Try the political quiz

3,776 Replies

@627XNDQRepublicanfrom Pennsylvania  answered…12mos

@5XWQY5MConstitutionfrom Virginia  answered…12mos

No. Some people deserve to die. In fact, let's expand it to include child molesters, corrupt politicians, and the jerk who steals my parking space.

@624R6YSRepublicanfrom California  answered…12mos

Yes and all death row prisoners should give up all rights and we should use body parts of all death row convicts as needed to save the lives of law abiding citizens

@5V567Q6Republicanfrom California  answered…12mos

there should be labor camps where people who deserve severe punishments for their actions would have to do hard labor in different fields of their choosing!

@5V4M9FLConstitutionfrom Alabama  answered…12mos

The Victim's family should decide the punishment after it is ruled the criminal did the crime 100% true

@5V4Q4C2Constitutionfrom Ohio  answered…12mos

Yes, bring back public hangings and executions for more serious crimes. There needs to be more deterrents because our jails are like hotels.

@6CFVGDDConstitutionfrom Texas  answered…12mos

I would rather support the elongated torture of prisoners over the death penalty, or life in prison. The fear of being thrown into prison would send shivers down the spines of those locked in urban conflict, as well as lead toward everlasting peace within the United States.

@6FTVM4NDemocratfrom Maryland  answered…12mos

Yes, but only for an offender who murders a law enforcement officer, a correctional office, or another inmate while incarcerated.

@Jean-Luis-RojasRepublicanfrom Florida  answered…12mos

Its hard, but terrorists, child molesters, people who commit crimes against humanity can suffer the death penalty. The death penalty can take these dangerous people out of the world, if they are not willing to change or if they are very dangerous. If we kill bad people in war, is hypocritical to say is wrong to kill bad people outside of war. Obviously you have to follow the laws and procedures.

@6G6WNKXRepublicanfrom Minnesota  answered…12mos

Yes, but only for horrific crimes with undeniable evidence and the victim’s family should decide the punishment

@6G3JCWJGreenfrom New York  answered…12mos

For fascists and pedophiles, but it should be done on a community-based protocol, not through the federal government.

@5YC46BTDemocratfrom Massachusetts  answered…12mos

I support cruel and unusual punishment rather than the death penalty or life in prison.

@6C58RQQConstitutionfrom New York  answered…12mos

It is morally justifiable to execute a guilty person. It is not morally justifiable to kill innocent babies in the womb.

@9XLGBFJAlliance ’90/The Greensfrom Tennessee  answered…4 days

Murder is never justified under any circumstances, even towards murderers.

@9XKGHNBTranshumanist from Texas answered…5 days

@9XDZL2MRepublican from Texas answered…2wks

Yes, but only in cases of absolute guilt for horrific crimes

@9X9SFHLDemocrat from Michigan answered…2wks

@YvokeLibertarianfrom Florida  answered…1yr

No, too many innocent people are convicted, and would not have a chance to be released out of custody if there wasn’t any evidence, or if there was new evidence indicating a new suspect.

@9X6B2VQGreen from California answered…3wks

No, a government should not have the jurisdiction to decide between life or death.

@9WZ92QNDemocrat from California answered…4wks

No, because the current implementation of the death penalty is too expensive.

@9WXRQMVGreen from Kansas answered…4wks

@9WL4LHZLibertarian from New York answered…1mo

No, through all criminals in a pit and leave them to make hell for echother

@9WJMYLJRepublican from North Carolina answered…1mo

Generally no. Every once in a while there is a potentially heinous crime that makes me reconsider my position.

@9WHF9XBRepublican from New York answered…1mo

Yes, but only if it is the option safest for the community.

@9W9ZBPQWomen’s Equality from Nebraska answered…1mo

Yes, but only if they are a continued threat to the public, if not a continued threat they should not be put to death.

@9VPQ272Women’s Equality from Nebraska answered…3mos

Yes, but only if they are a continued threat to the public, lets save lives.

@9VNHGC8Independent from Michigan answered…3mos

@9VH73GPTranshumanist from Virginia answered…4mos

Provide the convicted the option of life imprisonment without parole or death with the choice of execution method but only for extreme situations.

@9VF5M87Democrat from New York answered…4mos

@Connor-BonhamPeace and Freedom from North Carolina answered…5mos

No, I do not trust the government with the task, people on death row have been proven innocent, such an irreversible punishment is not ideal

@9V4Y8FTRepublican from Washington answered…5mos

@9TXRBW2Republican from Florida answered…5mos

@9TR3WMSLibertarian from Michigan answered…5mos

Neutral. I do believe that only for horrific crimes with undeniable evidence should face the death penalty. However, too many people are innocently convicted, the death penalty, as it is now, is costly, and life in prison is a harsher sentence.

@9TJFPD9Veteran from California answered…6mos

Yes, but only for horrific crimes with undeniable evidence and if the criminal is unwilling to change for the better.

@9TCQT9KRepublican from Arizona answered…6mos

No, its expensive and life in prison would definitely be more satisfying than a serial killers getting their sentence cut short

@9TBZ8QZIndependent from Texas answered…6mos

I think people should be punished for certain crimes, but I personally couldn't decide if someone could die or not.

@9T488R4Libertarian from Colorado answered…6mos

No, the government should never have the authority to end the lives of its own citizens.

@9T2C9RMDemocrat from Texas answered…7mos

Only for the following: serial killers and mass murderers that have no viable path towards rehabilitation; prominent and powerful leaders of terrorist organizations where there is incontrovertible evidence towards their actions in murdering innocent people; people found guilty or war crimes, or crimes against humanity.

@9SZ238GLibertarian from Virginia answered…7mos

No, the government should not have the power or authority to take the lives of its citizens.

@Musharrat-Chowdh…Socialist from Michigan answered…7mos

No, it's too much power for the justice system to have, many people are innocently convicted, and it costs more for a person to receive the death penalty than to serve a life sentence.

@9SQXY79Republican from New Jersey answered…7mos

Each case is different. I believe it should be in place, but only used for certain circumstances. The defendant can't ask for the death penalty, the circumstances must be horrific and undeniable, the family must support the death penalty and he/she can't show any signs of improvement while on death row, including remorse, marriage, children, religion.

@9SBT27KSocialist from Pennsylvania answered…8mos

Yes, if the offender is proven unsalvageable by repeat offenses and failed attempts at rehabilitation

@John-McKinneyPeace and Freedom from Rhode Island answered…8mos

No, but there are exceptions. Only for truly horrific crimes and if the criminal has no redeeming qualities and is a true sociopath. Criminals like that are too dangerous to be kept alive and jail is too good for him.

Crimes punishable by death (Do not kill the criminal through torture):

Mass Murder (Unless it's self defense).
Genocide.
Physical Torture (Including executioners).
Hate Crimes (Of all kind. Especially White Supremacists and Neo-Nazis).
Poaching (Unless it's for survival or self-defense).
Animal Cruelty.
Treason.
War Crimes.

The only caveat is if the criminal is redeemable. How do we discover that? Well give them a fair trial. Innocent until proven guilty. Give them a few therapy sessions and see whether they are redeemable or not.

Engagement

The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart...