Death Penalty Support Poll

[Intell]

Vote 2 times, one for your party identification and one time for your opinion on the death penalty.

Myself, Yes (D).

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Only for sickly teenagers whose parents and ancestors were bad people (D).

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Absolutely not (D)

[SWE]

What's the point of making us vote twice?

[TNF]

I oppose the death penalty outside of extraordinary conditions, i.e. outside of the context of a revolutionary war. And even then I would limit its application to those guilty of treason only. (Although I have a much more expansive definition of what constitutes 'treason' than do our liberal friends)

[Brewer]

Absolutely not (D)

[Mr. Smith]

Not as it is currently practiced

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I won't lie. There are certain historical occasions I could see myself supporting the death penalty, such as during the Nuremberg Trials. But there's absolutely no practical need in present times.

Beside, the concept of state taking lives is abhors me.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Only for Prince George of Cambridge.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Only for Prince George of Cambridge.

But not until he turns 18 (humanitarian)

[Murica!]

I oppose the death penalty outside of extraordinary conditions, i.e. outside of the context of a revolutionary war. And even then I would limit its application to those guilty of treason only. (Although I have a much more expansive definition of what constitutes 'treason' than do our liberal friends)

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

Yes (R)

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I don't trust the criminal justice system well enough to support it.

[Rockefeller GOP]

Not the way it's used in some states like Texas, but I do support it in some rare cases (serial killers who have done unspeakably bad things to children, for example).  I'll admit I'm not sure what specific legal infrastructure or precedent should be in place to "draw the line."

[RogueBeaver]

Yes (R)

[H. Ross Peron]

On a theoretical level yes. Should be restricted and streamlined in practice.

[TDAS04]

No.

While I believe that there are evil people who may deserve to die, an imperfect society cannot be trusted with the authority to kill its members, or else someone who does not deserve death will inevitably be executed.  Trying to paraphrase a post by homelycooking, executing 1,000 heinous, remorseless murders is not worth executing a single innocent person.

[Mr. Illini]

Absolutely not (D)

[IceSpear]

Yes (D)

[Goldwater]

Yes (R)

[Maxwell]

No (I)

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Only for a first degree murder verdict, reached by 2 separate juries in 2 different trials. And use the guillotine instead of a lethal injection.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

No (R), but I have not sympathy for the 99.9% of victims who are actually guilty.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Yes (D)

[traininthedistance]

More or less what Kal said.  I'm opposed as a general rule, but I do reserve the right to keep a "break glass in case of Nazis" exception for extreme cases of genocide and war crimes.