Do you support the death penalty in cases of heinous crimes involving murder?

Yes: 79.1% (351 votes)
No: 18.7% (83 votes)
Undecided: 2.3% (10 votes)

444 votes cast

Comments

View 8 comments

Community discussion is important, and we encourage you to participate as a reader and commenter. Click here to see our Guidelines. We also encourage registered users to let us know if they see something inappropriate on our site. You can do that by clicking "Report Comment" below. Our goal is to create a place for robust and civil discourse about our community, state and nation.

Make the penalty fit the crimes.

-- Posted by david gaither on Sat, Sep 21, 2019, at 7:24 AM
The only reason I said no is because we have so many people on death row right now that are innocent. Many people have been found to be innocent by dna and other pieces of evidence that have already been executed for crimes they did not commit. If we didn't have that issue i'd say go for it.

-- Posted by Eric Aide on Sun, Sep 22, 2019, at 9:52 PM
If you are Pro Life and Pro death penalty than you are a hypocrite.

-- Posted by Jeffrey Bollinger on Mon, Sep 23, 2019, at 4:29 PM
Pro life and Pro death is hypocritical, I think not. One life is totally innocent, the other is guilty

-- Posted by Larry Lacey on Mon, Sep 23, 2019, at 4:46 PM
Mr. Lacey, perhaps you are correct, but that is with human judgement (which we know is flawed). I would rather leave the judgement to a higher power. Mr. Scaggs, I also agree with you and your assessment of our penal system. We need to quit locking up the people we are mad at (traffic, taxes, pot etc.), and only lock those us who we are afraid of (endangering others). Put those who we are mad at to work to earn their keep and serve their time!

-- Posted by Mary Morton on Tue, Sep 24, 2019, at 5:42 AM
Sense the age of DNA there’s very little chance of wrongful imprisonments or death penalty, unless a overzealous prosecutor withholds evidence in a case, like Kamala Harris did in California to a man on death row, and she’s not the only one that has done that, and anyone that would do that needs to be charged with murder also.

-- Posted by david gaither on Tue, Sep 24, 2019, at 8:55 AM
I always find these questions themselves interesting. Not for heinous crimes that aren't murder? Not for murders that aren't heinous? That certainly would limit who is sentenced to death.

-- Posted by Harry Kiefer on Thu, Sep 26, 2019, at 3:22 PM
As the son of a mother who was murdered by a serial killer I can remember telling law enforcement officials to get the killer but make sure it is the right person..my family did not want a conviction for convictions sake..it took 25-26 years but the person was identified and sentenced to life..survivors had to agree to a sentence of life so the guilty person would confess to all 9 murders.

Remember the saying it is better for 99 guilty persons go free than one innocent person be convicted.

I now spend time reading about the many innocent persons wrongfully convicted of crimes.

With all the advancements in DNA and other tools I would advocate for reviewing all murder convictions and all contested death and life sentences..

-- Posted by don call on Thu, Sep 26, 2019, at 4:25 PM

Respond to this poll

Posting a comment requires a subscription.