Hey,justsayin--The death penalty is NOT a deterent and never will be. Murderers will still murder. They do not draw a gun or a knife on the person and think "oh, wait. If I'm caught, they'll put me to death. I'd better not do this." Whether a killer plans for months to do away with his enemy because he hates them or whether he goes in to steal and ends up killing someone. The possibility of being put to death will NOT stop them. I agree with and support the death penalty--not as a deterent to murder but as a means of ridding society of the murderers. And it should be a lot faster process than it is. Sitting on death row for 10, 15 years is ridiculous.

Jimkata and Carmelos said exactly what I beleive - I would add - The law needs to be changed - Currenly a person is found guilty "beyond all reasonable doubt" which is a very high standard and adaquate to send one to prision but for the death penalty they need to be proved guilty "beyond any doubt at all" and all proof needs to be scientific - Eye witness testamony can not be relied on - People lie - DNA, fingerprints, etc do not - Now experts giving this scientific evidence can lie so all scientific evidence needs to be verified by more than one expert. Maybe three - All these steps are expensive of course and would only be used in the case of the death penalty.

the case of Cameron Todd Willingham seemed to be a case that should not have gotten the death penalty, he actually seemed innocent or there was enough lack of scientific back up evidence to give reasonable people enough doubt. But lack of a death penalty is not helping Mexico at all, some people in this world are sadistic and happy to molest/torture children and murder and commit truly heinous crimes. It is hard to justify keeping certain criminals with life in prison. I kind of gravitate to China and Singapore's stance of giving a death penalty in some drug dealers cases who sell large amounts, rather than Mexico's practically pampering murderers/torturous sadistic drug cartels. I think Texas should be careful but some cases call for the death penalty, just should be last resort though.

The State of Texas needs to crank up the death chamber. With all the new technology at the hands of law enforcement nowadays, it's a lot harder to make a mistake especially on a killer that deserves to die.

add my vote to the 61% but if an innocent person is put to death due to a jury verdict, then one jury member goes with the prosecutor for they also committed a crime. Sure, they can have a trial. Which one of the jury members is selected, how about the jury leader.

yep, and pretty soon everyone's blind !!

An eye for an eye!

Aint no reason to fall behind. Fill all of Death Row with 3 inches of gas, & toss in a lit match. When flames burn out, wash remains back into sewer from where they came with high pressure hose. Repeat as needed

Hey, debate buddy (I have a real hard time calling you 12yroldgirl), I agree with you for the most part. I do understand your argument about the involvement of the Federal or State governments. However, leaving it totally up to the family isn't necessarily the answer, either, because they will most often go for the most extreme punishment, which I totally understand, but often they'll opt for the extreme punishment when it really isn't called for. So, you've got to let the Federal or State government set the guidelines and parameters for what is a capital punishment offense. I would say, leave it up to voters, but, how many voters will there be that have a reason to be full of hatred and revenge and vote to the extreme?!?!?! You've got to set parameters before turning the decisions over to totally devastated and emotionally destroyed families. watchout4me: The first two sentences of your comment is the way I felt when I was young. I eventually grew up and learned the truth of the rights God as given us, and this is one of them. And, as I mentioned earlier, with today's advances in forensics and technologies, there should be little left to question in someone's guilt........if the evidence is there. But, hey, that's what a jury trial is all about, and "beyond a reasonable doubt". Yeah, it's a gamble for the defendant, but the percentages of an innocent person being convicted and put to death, or spending the rest of their life in jail, has been greatly reduced for a number of reasons.

We need to bring back 'old Sparky'. The death penalty should be used, and often. We should put in an express lane (to quote Ron White). To give a criminal the death penalty and then let him sit in prison for 15-18 years in itself is a crime. No appeal, they had a trial of their peers, that was their appeal! Just get it done and move on.