Poll: Majority of Americans Support the Death Penalty
- Editorial Board
- in
- Politics,
- Legal
- Follow this Topic
- 2 months ago
It's the age-old death penalty debate: A new survey by the Pew Research Center finds that 62% favor the death penalty for people convicted of murder, while 31% are opposed.
Support for the death penalty reached a historic high point in 1996, when 78% favored capital punishment for people convicted of murder. But that number declined to 66% in 2001 and has remained in the low-to-mid 60s ever since.
When Gallup first asked about the death penalty in 1936, 59% supported the policy, and this number fell to an all-time of 42% in 1966.
Interestingly, there is a racial difference in support for capital punishment. The death penalty continues to draw much more support from whites (68%) than from African Americans (40%). Among Hispanics, 52% favor the death penalty for people convicted of murder while 42% are opposed.
Join the discussion: How do you feel about the death penalty? Why do you support it (retribution, cost of prison, deterrence, etc.) and under what circumstances? On what grounds do you oppose it (i.e. legal, moral, health, etc.)?
Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons
Sign up to join the discussion
Editorial Board
The editorial board is based in New York City and is composed of Jake Horowitz, Chris Miles, Jordan Wolf, and Chris Altchek. In promoting insight...
Most Mic'd Responses
I do not support the death penalty. Unlike other forms of punishment, the death penalty is irreversible. Since 1973, 138 people have been wrongfully convicted. The death penalty violates The Declaration of Human Rights and discriminates against racial minorities. Although people say that the death penalty decreases the crime rate in a region, FBI data shows that the fourteen states without capital punishment have the same or lower death rates.
- 4
- View
Featured Stories
-
Supreme Court Could Rule That Using Race As a Factor in School Admissions is Unconstitutional
-
Can Mitt Romney Fend Off Rick Santorum? What to Expect At the CNN Arizona Republican Debate
-
Millennials Look for SNL and Comedy Central-Style Humor in Their President, and Neither Mitt Romney Nor Barack Obama Has It
-
Unlike with SOPA and PIPA, Americans Will Not Protest Against Drones As an Invasion of Privacy
-
India’s Infrastructure is at Risk to Cyber Attacks
The Discussion
Close All ThreadsI do not support the death penalty. For me it is simply a matter of compassion. One exception is in the case of clearly psychotic killers who are of the Jeffrey Dahmer type. In those cases, I think that compassion might even dictate that we take a person's life--for his or her own good.
Since the request is more of a personal opinion (how I would vote if given the chance), I unequivalently and uncategorically without exception state I am against the death penalty. I do not believe in retribution. Life in prison in solitary confinement without possibility of parole allows a person to contemplate their acts. Perhaps they develop an understanding that they ended a life of another in an act that cannot be taken back. It is a burden on society but one we must bare. But solitary confinement is not cruel or unusual punishment. I oppose the death penalty because of the true possibility that they may be innocent. This has been proved over and over again. Death can not be undone when new facts come forth to prove innocence.
1 Replies
The logic of death penalty supporters seems to be that alternative punishments such as life imprisonment are inadequate. But given the serious drawbacks of the death penalty (killing someone who we learn is innocent, cost of running appeals) I propose that we explore an alternative: torture. We can make torture as unbearable as we want to, using modern medical technology to cause pain without actual damage. But unlike the death penalty we can always compensate a victim who turns out to be innocent.
Anyone who supports the death penalty ought to support torture as a smarter alternative.
I don't believe anyone should be supportive of the death penalty unless they are prepared to flip the switch or inject the poison personally. The theoretical conversation about this barbaric act is tiresome. Capital punishment is too often used on minorities; it is irreversible (which Mr. Long mentioned); it is murder; it costs too much because the process is inefficient; the people tried for capital crimes are often represented by incompetent counsel; it is societal-approved revenge and so on. Finally, we don't kill enough people each year who are convicted of capital crimes to make even a small dent in the size of our prison populations.
I oppose the death penalty because it is not a deterrent but a retribution. However, since the death penalty is retribution, perhaps the victims' families should make the final decision. As far as public concern goes, a life sentence w/o possibility of parole keeps murderers contained.
The majority of Christians support the death penalty. Odd.
1 Replies
Speaking from a position of faith, who are we to judge that another person does not have the right to live? It is God's position to judge. Speaking secularly, how many innocent people have been put to death be because of the bias in our justice system? Until we can that bias the death penalty will continue to put innocent people to death.
I oppose capital punishment on principle. But whatever our moral persuasion on the matter, the death penalty should be eliminated because it is, quite simply, inefficient. According to a 2008 study by the Urban Institute, MD taxpayers pay $3m for every capital case, compared to the usual $1.1m.
No, because the juries tend to be unrepresentative of the general population. For example, in death penalty proceedings, the prosecutor must select a "death-qualified" jury (i.e. no one objects to sentencing a person to death). This results in biased juries, at the expense of the defendant.
Absolutely oppose it, especially the way it convicts minorities at much higher numbers. Rich white people rarely get the death penalty, and rarely get falsely convicted.
2 Replies
1 Replies
With so many wrongful convictions being overturned in this country, the death penalty has become untenable. Even if one's personal beliefs allow for it in the abstract, how does one get around the nearly certain fact that under the current system, innocent people have been executed? Moratorium time.
The problem with the death penalty is that its rather final. There can be no appeal from it.
Appeals are there because judges and juries are made up of fallible humans. Mistakes are made by these people. Mistakes are made by the police as well. Nobody involved anywhere in the process is anything even remotely approaching perfect. Without perfection how can we justify such a permanent punishment?
--- IN MY OPINION ---
No one who thinks with an organ above their navel can ever support the death penalty.
10 Replies
9 Replies
7 Replies
I will say, No, Never, under any circumstances. Despite the flawed judicial and legal system, the cost of killing someone is much more expensive than imprisoning them for life. That is, granted, because of litigation, but "eye for an eye..."etc., etc. Other countries have given us a template of abolition, and those countries have less crime. The imprisonment rate and death penalty make this country look bad. It is, though, a good representation of how violent our culture is. I'm not going to get bent out of shape if the death penalty is not abolished, but it should continue to be used less and less. We are headed in that direction, but not quickly enough. Violence begets violence.
It's no surprise to me that the poll results should reflect a racial difference, seeing as how our prison population reflects one as well.
Do I support the death penalty as it is currently being administered? No. Do I support the death penalty if I knew for certain that the guilty person was the one being charged? I can't answer that question with the same conviction.
My humanity asks me to be against the death penalty; but it is that same humanity that recoils at the inhumanity of crime involving murder, especially if the victim were a loved one.
I'd have to deal with this on a case by case basis. There are those who make a tragic mistake; and then there are those who are beyond redemption. I'm honestly still on the fence on this issue.
I do not support the death penalty. Unlike other forms of punishment, the death penalty is irreversible. Since 1973, 138 people have been wrongfully convicted. The death penalty violates The Declaration of Human Rights and discriminates against racial minorities. Although people say that the death penalty decreases the crime rate in a region, FBI data shows that the fourteen states without capital punishment have the same or lower death rates.
DP doesn't deter,it cost more(appeals),&victims rarely feel better after someone is executed.We can't ever guarantee someone isn't innocent.Finally,no Christian can say Jesus would agree w/DP.His was the most unfair execution&He believes in redemption for all inc murderers.
3 Replies
2 Replies
Death should be reserved for repetitive or mass murderers who pose a serious danger to society should they ever escape. Until we scientifically reform our criminal justice system to ensure fair and accurate verdicts, we should refrain from sentencing anyone else to death.
3 Replies
2 Replies
1 Replies
I support the death penalty, however, it's unfair to society by the length of time it takes to carry out. I'm not against appeals. There must be limits both time and reason. Wrong people have been executed as we've seen with increase releases based on DNA. 1) Before a capital case goes to trial, DNA sampling must be part of the investigation. No match on DNA, there must be positive evidence connecting the accused to the crime scene to warrant seeking death. No such evidence, death not an option. This may not prevent wrongful conviction, but will prevent wrongful execution.
16 Replies
15 Replies
1 Replies
12 Replies
I do NOT support the death penalty. It is cruel and unusual punishment under the Constitution and abhorrent to any humane person. The state is in the business of meting out justice; not vengeance.
2 Replies
1 Replies