The United States is the only major Western nation that continues this barbaric practice.
csteele,
Well, you might call it Western, I don't anymore. I think Australia is the last Western society but even that is rapidly changing. Judging by your sentiments I gather you have never been the victim & or relative of a victim of crime. It does make a huge difference in one's thinking. It's what's commonly referred to as an eye-opener.

As always, this topic brings out the passion in people.

The arguments in favour tend to go to a perception of a deterrent effect, a social hygiene approach or a simple desire to have vengeance.

The arguments against go to the concept that we are socially advanced beyond such measures, the irreversible nature of the act making any excution of an innocent irremediable, the fact that there is no evidence of deterrence and (not yet discussed here, as far as I can tell) cost of implementing processes to ensure the accused has every chance to show why it should not be carried out in the particular case. There's also sometimes the issue raised about what crimes are appropriately punishable by this means: should it be all murders, or only those with aggravating circumstances; is violent rape in the set; should wilfully negligent actions that result in sufficiently bad outcomes be included and so on.

I used to strongly oppose it, but I'm more ambivalent these days, largely because I have more confidence that technological advance has made misapplication unlikely. I like the idea of having a social antiseptic available and I think that I'd personally rather be killed than spend my whole life in prison. I'm not too bothered whether it deters or not, we already have a justice system that is supposed to do that and doesn't seem to work too well at it, but nobody suggests we should dispense with that.

The compelling argument against, at least as it is done in the US, is cost. Death row is expensive to run and inmates spend on average over 10 years there. Some have spent over 20. Every assistance is provided to inmates to appeal their sentence, which can cost many millions.

On balance, I lean toward it being unjustified on that basis, since I think such an approach is essential for this to be a justiciary process and not just a barbaric act of vengeance.

Sueseonline you are mistaken if you think I don't like this country. I love this country, as does my grown children and does my grandchildren, when they grow old enough to appreciate the many many good things we have in this country. Particularly freedoms.

What is wrong with this country and many other western countries is we are very weak when it comes to the way we treat violent criminals and other very violent people. In eastern Europe from where I originally come from, they execute to punish offenders, not to deter offenders for punishment. Allowing these "pretend" ILLEGAL boat people into this country is importing more criminals. Australia will regret this move more and more, you watch.

Many experts say that execution does not prevent crime. So what. So it doesn't prevent crime. What execution should be used for is as a punishment. Nothing more or less. That ABC Lady in Melbourne who was killed and raped. If the bloke who did it is captured and found guilty, hang him. NOT to prevent crime, to punish him for the very evil crime he did to this lady.

I don't know your age Suseonline, but you seem to understand very little realities of this world by your strange stance on real and permenant punishment.

Dear Suseonline & others vehemently opposed to death penalty

Imagine if you will, a Denis Ferguson clone getting his grubby paws on your 8 or 10y/o daughter for a few weeks and when he's finished with her, there isn't much left for you to bury. What would your thoughts be concerning the death penalty after that ?? Note that I'm not arguing for or against, I'm not in the slightest bit clucky nor ever have been, consequently I'll never need to make this decision myself. When the Denis Ferguson media circus was playing, it certainly appeared that virtually everyone in Australia would have gladly exterminated the old bloke personally, and more to the point, they would have thoroughly enjoyed doing so. I'd love to how someone totally opposed to the death penalty would respond to something very close to home.

Antiseptic - I'm more ambivalent these days, largely because I have more confidence that technological advance has made misapplication unlikely.

My thoughts are exactly the opposite, the legal / judicial system has become totally inaccessible due to avaricious legal leeches (both practicing & political versions) & their supremely arrogant judicial cronies rearranging things to their own purposes, consequently I see no reason to have any confidence whatever in the whole sorry game. Doing a head amputation on some poor mug later found to be innocent is *NOT* good for ones karma. That aside, in general I don't have particularly strong feelings for or against, although I certainly wouldn't argue against capital punishment if someone proposed introducing it as penalty for the bloodsucking parasites in Canberra who commit every sin known to mankind and a heap more. As I've noted in another posting, I'd be EXTREMELY surprised if even the most rabid anti-capital punishment advocates didn't take a completely different tack when one of their rug-rats was 'used' by a Denis Ferguson clone & returned in several pieces. What would be your response ??

Praxidice, you may well be right about the self-serving nature of the legal system, especially in civil or administrative law matters and summary offences. However, despite the odd poor decision (the Baden-Clay matter comes to mind, where a man is sitting in prison awaiting trial for murderdespite there being nothing but a circumstantial case and innuendo against him) that often seem to be associated with lots of media attention, the criminal law works pretty well on the whole I think.

A trial and appeals process for serious criminality isn't taken lightly, as is only right and that is the main reason I oppose the DP. Thoroughness costs, and in our social democracy we taxpayers end up footing the bill for both sides, which makes long-term incarceration a more financially attractive option. Even in the US, where some lawyers routinely offer their services pro bono in capital matters, DP cases can cost millions.

It's just not worth the trouble, in my view.