Connecticut Rules Death Penalty Is Unconstitutional. How Do You Feel About The Death Penalty?

Rape, killing a cop, murder 1, sexual exploitation of a child...……….. brzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt! Fry them and Connecticut sux, been there, wouldn't give you $.39 for the entire state.

I'm all about the DS (funny how it stands both for Death Sentence and Drill Sergeant), but only when it has been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that the defendant is guilty and that death is a fit punishment for the crime.

I concur with previous comments about conducting this business humanely and to highlight that it's about deterrence as well as providing the stakeholders with a degree of justice.

I do not agree that courts, judges or juries should have the right to order a human being to death, regardless of the crime or the evidence.... God will handle that.

BUT what should happen, the perp should be locked in a 6' x 10' cement walled room, NO windows, one light bulb, a steel toilet and sink, a bunk and NOTHING ELSE. No TV, no games, no visitors, no exercise periods. Meals are basic bland 3 times a day of the same cheap thing. Some would say it is cruel and unusual, they would go insane... so? Let them. They are locked in a cement hole.. they can beat themselves or scream all they want. The only way they EVER leave that room is suicide OR they choose themselves to be put to death.

In terms of others deciding to impose the death penalty, INSTEAD and as long as the evidence is clear, there is NO doubt, no ambiguity, and that it clearly and unmistakably proves that person committed the act, then the death penalty decision should be given to the FAMILY of the victim.

THEY, the victims family, should decide on the punishment at that level.. They have two choices they can make for punishment. death or life imprisonment, NO parole EVER... OR a third option.. They get 10 minutes in a room with the suspect, no windows, video, and whatever happens, happens. If, when they leave the room the perp is still alive, they get life no parole. If the perp is dead, case closed.

The military, law enforcement, and firefighters face the possibility of meeting death everyday; yet, nothing is said about their untimely and needless deaths other than for the naysayers to say these men and women volunteered for the job. Then there are the sorry excuses for humanity who go out and commit heinous crimes for whatever reason, and then expect to be treated with kid gloves. I, for one, believe in the death penalty. I'm also one who turned in my own son for the murder of a known drug dealer committed by him and a friend. He was lucky to have gotten twenty to life in prison...and all for $45 and a bag of crack. My final say on behalf of the death penalty is that stiffer sentences without rotating doors and/or awaiting a sharp needle means less opportunity for these crimes to be repeated.

I fully support the death penalty. The question is what does the death penalty really mean? Is it just a term used to imprison criminals for long term? They should have a strict guideline on when the death penalty should be carried out maybe not to exceed 3-5 years. This would definitely save tax-payers paying for three meals a day, free room and board, free cable TV, free medical care and may prevent overcrowding in the prisons. I'm sure I have missed some other benefits but those are some that makes common sense. They definitely didn't wait in the old western days. This is just me rambling on.

If someone murders another, they forfeit their right to live. Terminate them.

I suppose there are a lot of people out there who probably would consider me a "Neanderthal," for many of my views on criminal justice. I believe in a far more speedy trial, limitation to no more than one appeal, and mandatory execution of the sentence in no less than one year, two at most under special circumstances. I believe that sentences should far more closely resemble the crimes committed. If a criminal shoots and kills someone, upon conviction his punishment should be swift, public, and should consist of being shot in exactly the same ways he shot his victim. If the criminal cut someone to death and they die, he should be cut in the same manner. If he bludgeons someone to death he in turn should be bludgeoned to death.

On the other hand, our criminal justice system is thoroughly broken. All attorneys in these cases basically are charged to win at all cost and damn truth or justice. Judges are nothing more than referees in most cases. So who in this system is responsible for seeing justice is done? There is no one. I believe that EVERYONE involved should have a first duty to seek truth and justice. Attorneys, whether prosecution or defense should be held accountable for this and punished if they violate their duty. Furthermore, the jury system we have does not work. Few juries are intellectually or educationally capable of hearing, understanding, and evaluating evidence. Additionally, the average person in the US does not, and can not, grasp the thought processes, or lack thereof, of violent criminals who lack any empathy for their victims and bring only narcissistic motivations to the crimes they commit.
I believe, quite honestly, that if executions were conducted swiftly, publicly, and horribly, the violent crime rate, and murder in particular would rapidly decline, and certainly there would be no recidivism.

Innocent people have been put to death. And some were put death based on circumstantial evidence. Totally against it.

In most instance I agree with the death penalty ,however...there are some instances where the conviction was proved to be an unlawful conviction by new DNA testing.Over 12 in the state of Alabama alone in the past 8 years.If it is verified that the penalty is warranted by exculpatory ,and proper forensic evidence and not circumstantial evidence,i agree.The unfortunate part is that it takes way to long and should bear forth the option of electric,chemical,bullet or noose.As stated long ago,it is by this court, that tomorrow at dawn, you shall hang by your neck until dead and may god have mercy upon your sole.,if you have one.... Judge Roy Bean

I know it's not a popular position but count me as anti-death penalty. There are just too many innocent people on death row. We hear about cases all the time of people wrongfully convicted. And the cost of making sure it's being applied correctly -- that the person has had a fair trial and the penalty applied in accordance with the 8th Amendment -- is way more than keeping someone for life with no parole. For all that, research has pretty much proven that it doesn't really deter crimes anyway. Fear of the needle hasn't brought the murder rates down much.

Ultimately, though, it's just wrong. The state shouldn't be killing people. Even murderers and terrorists should get a chance to redeem themselves even it it's from a jail cell from which they'll never be released. And when the state kills people for revenge they make it that much easier for other people to do it too.