Do you support the death penalty?

For those who commit sexual crimes upon children.

I support it, with irrevocable proof. But I also know a lot that were on death row, were innocently convicted. But the amount of money that would go into retrial, was hefty back then. Serial killers should, receive the death penalty. 100%

No, punitive justice is never justified. Each criminal should be afforded comfortable living conditions and rehabilitation if deemed possible.

Yes, for Homicide, mass murderer, serial killer, terrorist, rape, crime against children, crime against humanity and act of treason against the peoples of Canada.

It depends on the crime. Those who abuse children, especially Autistic children who went through ABA (applied behavioural analysis, which is objectively abusive, many Autistics myself included have had PTSD from it. Look it up), or are cops who kill POC or disabled people, vilify them based on race, sexual orientation or disability. Like George Floyd’s killer for example absolutely deserved it more than anything. Those who are clearly mentally ill should go to a mental health institution but provide rehabilitation so they are no longer a danger. But both the victims family or even the perpetrator should decide the punishment. It’s a complex answer.

No. I believe our justice system has a lot more growing to do concerning its own prejudices and beliefs before deciding the fate of an individual.

No, death penalty is no different than murder. Zero parole for entire life, not just a life sentence, and support consecutive life sentences.

No, work camps, food, water, shelter, education related to harm they have caused, mental health support

yes, but only for horric crimes with undeniable evidence where the accused had no reason or without a justifiable reason such as if the victim was the accused abuser

No, rather employ inmates in harsh or less ideal workforce jobs that can be safely supervised such as road and rail construction

if the person being accused has undeniable evidence and is a horrific crime like murder, rape, sexual assault ect. the victim should get to decide (or the family if the victim is no longer alive)

Only for the most horrific crimes. I personally think living the rest of your life in jail is much more of a suitable punishment then the death penalty.

Yes, but the victim's family should decide, and only if it is a horrific crime with undeniable evidence

No, life is given by God and gouvernement has no right to take it

No, but with the exception of corrupt CEOs or government officials. There needs to be a very high price for corruption. Especially if cost cutting measures of CEOs result in deaths of consumers.

Yes, but meted out by the victim's family and only in air-tight, brutal, sadistic and truly malevolent cases. Any cased determined only by circumstantial evidence or DNA, no way. Too much room for bad trial procedure, faulty or corrupt laboratory work. It would seem that a second hearing would be needed to make sure that conviction met a VERY stringent criteria.

I think it would only be fair if the victims family got to choose but they should be 100% proven guilty. Too many innocent lives were taken due to false sentences

Crimes like murder and/or sexual offences against children(living! Not fetuses)should have capital punishment

Yes, but only with substantial clear evidence and only with the purpose of completely eliminating the possibility of that crime occurring by the same person a second time. Punishment is a waste, 100% prevention is worthwhile but only with crimes where the risk of recidivism is extreme. Child abuse, murder, sex trafficking, and so forth

no, for two reasons which are; too many people are innocently convicted and spending life in prison is a harsher sentence. The death penalty is pretty much an easy way out. But, also i think they should improve their system because people who are mistakenly convicted of something and are sent to prison to later be found not guilty is very inhumane.

No, the offender should have to help right some of their wrong. Skin and organ donations.

Yes, but only at the request of the convict

Yes, but only those who have taken the lives of others with undeniable evidence.

No. We should focus on rehabilitation of people in prisons rather than punishment and/or death.

Persons sentenced to life in prison without parole should be given the option to elect death or serve the term.

No, the death penalty will increase number of appeals and increase costs and burden to the legal system.

We need to find out who's guilty and who's not guilty. And the family can choose the kind of torture is it from their country or way?

Yes, if a serious crime was committed and should be the victim’s family choice for the death penalty

Yes, but only from a pragmatic standpoint wherein the accused has been psychologically proven to be unfit to ever return to society, and there is undeniable evidence that they perpetrated the crime they're accused of. Prison is about rehabilitation, not punishment, and if no rehabilitation is possible than it is simply a cost to the taxpayers

I don't think anybody has the right to sentence another human to death.

no, i don't think the death penalty should be allowed at all.

It depends on the criminal and how the fair in prison. If they do well then the death penalty but if they do bad keep them there. The punishment suits the criminal and the crime

Death penalty is immoral. It's not okay to kill anyone even if they are a bad person. Death penalty is something that should be outlawed. Lots of innocent people end up killed in countries with death penalty.

No, this can be easily abused and lead to either wrongful convictions or future apologies due to unforgivable acts of injustice.

I think the victim’s family should have a say on the punishment but I think the death penalty should be replaced with a testing penalty and all serious criminals should be used for product testing instead of animals

Yes, why have those sent to spend life in jail get free food and shelter while the rest of us have to struggle just to keep them?

No. The death penalty is barbaric

It depends on the crimes, the circumstances, the motive, and if there are multiple pre-meditated horrific crimes. A serial killer who kills for enjoyment, and has a high kill count is a person I would want to be sentenced to the death penalty.

Yes But Only If The Person Is A Terrorist,Mass Murderer Or War Criminal

No, though i may believe some people deserve to die, giving any entity the power to determine who lives and who dies is a very slippery slope that quickly leads to abuse

No except in very severe cases

The family's victims should definitely have a say and the victims should have the absolute say in the punishment, if they say dead then that's what happens, send them to space if it's bad enough idc

No, it is more cost-efficient to keep them in jail.

I think that the death penalty should be only for people who have a high chance of escaping, or if they did something REALLY bad, and it is certain that they did it.

yes everything requires the death penalty

Yes, especially for murder, treason and sedition.

No, any use of the death penalty at any level of government is a clear violation of The Ten Commandments and I strongly oppose any and all effort to reinstate it

No, abolish the death penalty. Jail should be for the worst criminals, and rehabilitation should be the best resort

Only if the criminal is insane and doesn't regret his choices. Every human deserves a second chance and if the criminal repents religiously or lawfully he deserves a new shot at life.