A Quote by Martin O'Malley

The death penalty is ineffective as a deterrent, and the appeals process is expensive and cruel to the surviving family members. — © Martin O'Malley
The death penalty is ineffective as a deterrent, and the appeals process is expensive and cruel to the surviving family members.
I am pro-death penalty, but not an enthusiastic death-penalty person. I think there's a place for it, that it should serve as a deterrent.
I think we've misinterpreted some of the scriptures to justify the death penalty. So whereas a lot of folks in America feel like we can do far better justice? - ?it's more expensive to do the death penalty than the alternatives? - ?there's so many reasons that people come to the conclusion to abolish the death penalty.
The death penalty is no more effective a deterrent than life imprisonment... It is also evident that the burden of capital punishment falls upon the poor, the ignorant and the underprivileged members of society.
And so it's no surprise that people who object to the death penalty on pure moral grounds also think it has no deterrent effect, and people who like the death penalty on grounds of retribution tend to think it has deterrent effects. They like that, and they believe that. I think with climate change we're seeing very much the same thing where those who deny climate change, they don't like that, and they don't believe it.
I regard the death penalty as a savage and immoral institution that undermines the moral and legal foundations of society. I reject the notion that the death penalty has any essential deterrent effect on potential offenders. I am convinced that the contrary is true - that savagery begets only savagery.
The Bible identifies 15 crimes against the family worthy of the death penalty. Abortion is treason against the family and deserves the death penalty. Adultery is treason to the family; adulterers should be put to death. Homosexuality is treason to the family, and it too, is worthy of death.
I believe that the death penalty is the ultimate deterrent to violent crime...period.
I personally have always voted for the death penalty because I believe that people who go out prepared to take the lives of other people forfeit their own right to live. I believe that that death penalty should be used only very rarely, but I believe that no-one should go out certain that no matter how cruel, how vicious, how hideous their murder, they themselves will not suffer the death penalty.
The death penalty system is fundamentally flawed - it is inequitable, ineffective, and it has no place in this Commonwealth or this country.
Those who support the death penalty are accepting a practice that is both ineffective and fundamentally flawed.
I'm totally against the death penalty - which, if anyone has a right to support, I do - because I do not see it as a deterrent to crime.
It's absolutely clear that whatever cruel and unusual punishments may - may mean with regard to future things, such as death by injection or the electric chair, it's clear that - that the death penalty, in and of itself, is not considered cruel and unusual punishment.
I would say that there are a lot of people who currently disagree with the death penalty, I just hope that it's never one of their family members that is killed, because then they will probably change their mind on capital punishment.
I have inquired for most of my adult life, about studies that might show that the death penalty is a deterrent, and I have not seen any research that would substantiate that point.
The death penalty would be even more effective, as a deterrent, if we executed a few innocent people more often.
I support the death penalty because I believe, if administered swiftly and justly, capital punishment is a deterrent against future violence and will save other innocent lives.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!