I'd try to banish it.

I don't deny that it provides closure to victims' families; and in some cases, an argument could be made for its punitive value. But it's not scaring people into obeying the law; it's (for obvious reasons) not rehabilitative; it's not moral; and perhaps most importantly, it's irreversible.

As much faith as I have in the judicial process (and I do have faith in it, I promise), it is a human process. That means mistakes are made; evidence is lost or wrongfully suppressed; jurors have bad days; defense attorneys are asleep at the wheel; witnesses lie; etc.; etc....

It's a bad idea to play God when we have the truth-finding capacities of mere mortals.

. . .let the states decide this for themselves. As a national leader, it isn't that big of a deal.

I support the death penalty but it's extremely flawed, so I would probably do away w/it until it was reviewed.

i would use it for extreme cases such as serial killers and terrorists where there is absolutly no doudt of the criminals guilt

I would abolish the death penalty. How ever before doing this I would make sure that the minumim sentence for all crimes that are currently punishable by death would be life in prison without the possibility of parole. I would also not over-turn any death-penalty conviction that have already been sentenced, or trials in progress that are seeking the death penalty.

Leave it to the states. I personally support capital punishment, but states should be free to deal with crime and criminals as they choose.

I have a hard time with the death penalty. Not because I don't think someone who is a murderer doesn't deserve it. My concern is, what if we make a mistake. What if an innocent man or woman is wrongly convicted? Once they're dead thats it. Oops, sorry just doesn't cut it. I would rather see a guilty man spend the rest of his (or her) life in prison, than an innocent person die needlessly.

Not intrinsically immoral but as presently exercised terminally flawed. I personally understand there are times when it should be exercised in cases of geonocide and such where the history and record are unquestionable but a weakly defended impoverished individual shouldn't bear the further burden of possible death for a poor defense.