CollegeNET.com - Scholarship Competition With Weekly Winners, Win Scholarship Money With Social Networking

Finally, a little bit of sense from government. The death penalty is a far outdated, expensive and unethical method of punishment that belongs in 1220, not 2012.
America is one of the few nations in the "civilized" world that continues to kill people who have committed a crime. As suprising as it may sound, it is in fact LESS expensive to keep someone in jail for the rest of their lives that to put them to death. Due to the appeals process, the process of actually executing another human being actually costs more than sustaining them for the rest of their life.
Furthermore, killing people is really a vengeful act that is inhumane. Many proponnents of the death penalty say "an eye for an eye" (revenge is the answer). Yet this quote, found in Hammurabi's law code, is often misunderstood. Hammurabi meant that the eye should be PAID for by the criminal, not pay the same fate. In the same way the loss of someone's life should be paid for by giving up all freedoms, not death itself. This "eye for an eye" attitude is the kind that is present in anarachist regions of the world and by "vigilantes" who seek revenge. It is not a civilized thought that should be present in our society. As Ghandi said "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind"
Good call government.

Honestly, all I can say is that I agree with pretty much everything you've said:)

I am pro death penalty and I disagree with it being abolished. I must admit that it has its flaws but it has benefits too. It would be better for the government to fix the death penalty process rather than eliminate it altogether.
Yes, it is more expensive to go through the process than to pay for a criminal's life sentence. I propose that we limit the appeals and stop allowing murderers to prolong their fate with appeal after appeal.
Executing someone who is a danger to society is not vengeful; it is an act done for the safety and well being of the community as a whole. I understand that not very many convicted felons ever escape prison, but why take the risk of their escape and more crime?
I don't want to offend anyone, but religion should not play a part in the decision to abolish, revise, or keep the death penalty. There is a separation of church and state that is supposed to keep religion from affecting these decisions.
If the process is revised it can be a valuable part of the civilized 21st century justice system.
Oftentimes I am bashed for my views on this topic. Please don't think I'm some blood thirsty barbarian. I'm not saying that we should execute criminals left and right. I just think that if a criminal confesses to a heinous violent crime, or has undeniable evidence against them, and they are irrefutably guilty, then the death penalty should at least be considered.

I like the idea that you “don't think humans should be able to decide who lives and who doesn't.” I feel the

same way. Yet, I want you to think about individuals who have committed murder. Is it possible to think

that if you kill a person, then you must believe you have some kind of right over somebody else’s life? If

you believe you have the power to determine whether a human being will continue to live or not, then it

would make you a hypocrite to think that others do not have that power. Therefore, if you have committed

murder, it means you believe you have the power to decide whether or not somebody’s life shall

continue. So, if you believe you have the right to decide about a human life, you should also believe

others have this power as well. If you believe others have this power too, then you must accept the

consequences of murder and acknowledge that if you get caught, you will give others the same right you

decided to craft for yourself. Otherwise you would be a hypocrite.



This is a segment from word coalition.com about Japan that refers to your question:

On December 29th 2011, Japan marked its first execution-free year since 1993. At that time, there had been no execution for 17 months since the last execution ordered by Justice Minister Keiko Chiba.

The past year's respite was achieved by the next Justice Minister Hideo Hiraoka, who resisted strong pressure from various strands of society calling for executions.


Also, another interesting related topic from the same website:

On 20 December 2011 the European Commission added sodium thiopental to the list of goods that are subject to tight export controls to ensure they do not find their way into overseas death chambers.

The Commission has decided not to completely ban the exportation of sodium thiopental and other barbiturates which are widely used as anaesthetics in lethal injections protocols across the US.
The text of the amended regulation states: “The relevant medicinal products were developed for inter alia anaesthesia and sedation and their export should therefore not be made subject to a complete prohibition.”