Capital punishment.

[Donald Trump]

Do you support capital punishment? If so, or if not why?
Do you actually believe that it deters crime? Or do you really just want old testament style retribution, an eye for an eye etc.

I don't personally. It achieves nothing. I suppose it saves on the cost of keeping people in jails, but that's not really a good enough reason to kill someone in my opinion. As it doesn't prevent crime, I can see no reason for it.

 

[Sir Kenneth]

I do support capital punishment, but only in the most severe of cases where an individual does something so despicable and completely beyond human comprehension that he/she can hardly be considered human at all and any kind of rehabilitation would be unrealistic. I don't for a second believe that this would deter crime in any way. To me it's all about ridding society of a burden we shouldn't have to suffer anywhere. Not even in our prisons.

Prison should not only be about punishment, but also about rehabilitation, so what is the purpose of just stoving away mass murderers and serial child rapists if we are never going to let them back into society anyway? We're better off putting them down like the sick animals that they are rather than letting society provide for them in prison until they die of old age.

I'd like to make it perfectly clear, that I only support capital punishment in the most extreme of cases though. A drug addict panicking during a drug store robbery and shooting someone dead, is not beyond rehabilitation and does not deserve to die. A man who comes home and finds his wife in bed with a colleague, and in a fit of rage commits a crime of passion does not deserve to die. A man who murders and rapes 12 little girls and buries them in his backyard, he deserves to die.

 

[Ness]

It's a shame I haven't made a thread like this myself.

As far as my personal views on capital punishment...it's sort of a hodgepodge of views. I do believe that there are some crimes that deserve the penalty of death, from a personal perspective. In the case of crimes such as intentional murder, violent rape, etc...I don't see any problem with putting the offender to death.

However, the real issue with capital punishment...as with a lot of hot-button issues isn't really what individuals think of it, but how our personal feelings about the punishment affects our particular nation's jurisprudence. I, for one, hold a personal view about capital punishment...but I don't agree with its current implementation, at least from the perspective of a US citizen.

When it comes to the use of capital punishment, there are several problems that continue to arise that must be addressed. I tend to question the legal theory of "presumption of innocence"...the whole "innocent until proven guilty" rigamarole. 12 average citizens make decisions over life and death in capital punishment cases...what if they simply judge a person based on race, or religion, or sexual preference? Does the average juror really pass along a conviction if he/she is truly convinced "beyond a reasonable doubt"?

All in all, I think there are too many problems with how the system currently works to fully support capital punishment, from a policy perspective. Alternately, I doubt there will ever be sufficient reform to make it acceptable...so overall, I say no.

 

[CassinoChips]

I suppose it saves on the cost of keeping people in jails,

It's more expensive to execute a criminal than to have them serve a life sentence. Remarkably so.

Report of the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice


“The additional cost of confining an inmate to death row, as compared to the maximum security prisons where those sentenced to life without possibility of parole ordinarily serve their sentences, is $90,000 per year per inmate. With California’s current death row population of 670, that accounts for $63.3 million annually.”

Using conservative rough projections, the Commission estimates the annual costs of the present (death penalty) system to be $137 million per year.​

The cost of the present system with reforms recommended by the Commission to ensure a fair process would be $232.7 million per year.​

The cost of a system in which the number of death-eligible crimes was significantly narrowed would be $130 million per year.​

The cost of a system which imposes a maximum penalty of lifetime incarceration instead of the death penalty would be $11.5 million per year.​

Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice, June 30, 2008).

To answer the question, I'm completely against the death penalty in all forms. It does not deter crime, it is unfairly applied, and it is as expensive as hell, as the previous quote shows. I've always found that it smacks of hypocrisy. "You're not allowed to kill people. To prove this, we are going to kill you." That, combined with the alarmingly large number of death penalty convictions that are later overturned by DNA evidence, etc., leads me to believe that the death penalty is a waste of resources.

 

[blakstang98]

Ok, I'm gonna post here, but first off I admit that I really don't know much about the laws relating to Capitol Punishment and all the ins and outs so to speak.

With that said, I am a supporter of Capitol Punishment, under certain conditions. Like Ness had pointed out, crimes like serial killing and violent rape are certainly enough for the death penalty in my opinion, just because a life sentence still wouldn't be enough for them to pay their debt to society due to all the damage they caused. I also think crimes that relate to seriously hurting children are also grounds for this. Anytime a felon goes to prison for any crime related to children, they get absolutely fucked up anyways because even felons, have children and wouldn't want their children to be harmed by such predators. Women and children are defenseless for the most part, and it's highly unfair for these people to walk publicaly again.

As for crimes that don't kill people or scar them for life, like say grand theft or something, I don't see a reason to put someone to death for. If some knucklehead embezzles money from you, you're going to pissed and want your money back (and depending on how much, you may want him dead as well), but you'll still have your life, you'll pick up and move on. Putting this person to death wouldn't really solve anything.

Anyways, I'll say again that I don't know a whole lot about this subjects relations, these are just my thoughts on the matter, so I'll keep it short and sweet. Happy debating!

 

[Vladislak]

I think it's kind of pointless, because (parden the cliche) there are things far worse than death.

Quite frankly, if I were given a choice between being detained for life or being executed, I'd take death. I don't hate life or anything, but there's no point in wasting food, water, and air if I'm never going to accomplish anything.

I mean, I have to have goals. I have to have a reason beyond just wasting away in jail.


And really, if someone is willing to risk capital punishment for a crime in the first place then it's not really much of a punishment to give it to him/her.

 

[Totoro]

I don't think killing of any kind should be sanctioned. Someone may have done something terrrible, unthinkable to most of the population, but how can you then decide that they have to die because of it?

I know it's from a film, so not exactly the firmest basis, but still, in LOTR when gandalf and frodo are discussing gollum, Gandalf says "many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them?"

Its something like that, but is my point exactly, how can you condem someone to death. You don't know what would happen if they were allowed to live.

I also think people are happy to implement the death penalty, as long as it has nothing to do with them. If they were the one's that had to flick the switch, they may feel differently. And what about the executioners? Surely they're doing the same, killing people, which will have some affect on them, mentally, and possibly taint their soul (if you believe in that).

Cost is irrelevent when you consider how much Governments have borrowed to save the banks in the wake of this current recession.


I don't think there's a justifiable argument that allows for the death penalty.

 

[Shu]

I'm going to step away from our governmental law and say that keeping a person alive with my tax dollar when I know for sure that this person, raped and killed a little child, makes me animalistic inside.. If you are saying it is more expensive to put someone to death, I don't believe it. Sorry, but if it cost money to put someone to death, then something is wrong there. There are shooting ranges, hanging, and other fun alternatives.

Without saying another word I believe in death for some people who deserve it. It isn't about teaching people lessons or making people suffer in jail rather than roast. It is about not letting the scum of the earth live. I think some people aren't meant to live. Cold I know, but if you sit there and say a child rapist should be kept alive, I think less of you as a person. There is no rehabilitation. It makes me sick inside to think about it. I'm ending this conversation now.

 

[Totoro]

I'm going to step away from our governmental law and say that keeping a person alive with my tax dollar when I know for sure that this person, raped and killed a little child, makes me animalistic inside.. If you are saying it is more expensive to put someone to death, I don't believe it. Sorry, but if it cost money to put someone to death, then something is wrong there. There are shooting ranges, hanging, and other fun alternatives.

Without saying another word I believe in death for some people who deserve it. It isn't about teaching people lessons or making people suffer in jail rather than roast. It is about not letting the scum of the earth live. I think some people aren't meant to live. Cold I know, but if you sit there and say a child rapist should be kept alive, I think less of you as a person. There is no rehabilitation. It makes me sick inside to think about it. I'm ending this conversation now.

Thats pretty damning. What if the abuser had himself been abused as a child? or had to witness terrible things. I'm not saying everyone will be sucessfully rehabilitated, but for those that there's a chance that they might, it has to be worth it. Life is sacred and ending anyone's shouldn't be so frivolous.

Now I'm not sympathising with them, this is mainly from an ethical view point. We're not animals and it isn't the survival of the fitess. Being able to empathise is a human trait, and being able to look beyond a persons terrible actions for society as a whole is what makes us human I think.

 

[Shu]

Thats pretty damning. What if the abuser had himself been abused as a child? or had to witness terrible things. I'm not saying everyone will be sucessfully rehabilitated, but for those that there's a chance that they might, it has to be worth it. Life is sacred and ending anyone's shouldn't be so frivolous.

Now I'm not sympathising with them, this is mainly from an ethical view point. We're not animals and it isn't the survival of the fitess. Being able to empathise is a human trait, and being able to look beyond a persons terrible actions for society as a whole is what makes us human I think.

I said rapist. Rapist... Rapist.. Not abuser, Rapist. Someone who rapes and then kills the child.

You let this person live.. I have pity on your own daughter or son.

 

[M1ghty Mous3]

Killing a person is not expensive. There are many ways that we could accomplish getting around that pot-hole but the gov. wouldn't allow it because it'd make us look like savages.

Long story short, you rape, murder a family of 4, abuse an animal to bloody hell and back, yada yada yada, you die. I have no sympathy for their wrecked souls that life has condemned upon them.

They choose to act. They know the difference between right and wrong. Period.

 

[CassinoChips]

If you are saying it is more expensive to put someone to death, I don't believe it. Sorry, but if it cost money to put someone to death, then something is wrong there. There are shooting ranges, hanging, and other fun alternatives.

It's not the killing part that costs money, though that does cost some. I think $85 for the chemicals. But that's not the point.

-A captial punishment trial is eight times as expensive as a "regular" trial. And that's only in cases where the death penalty is *sought*. It doesn't guarantee a capital conviction.

The average cost of defending a trial in a federal death case is $620,932, about 8 times that of a federal murder case in which the death penalty is not sought. A study found that those defendants whose representation was the least expensive, and thus who received the least amount of attorney and expert time, had an increased probability of receiving a death sentence. Defendants with less than $320,000 in terms of representation costs (the bottom 1/3 of federal capital trials) had a 44% chance of receiving a death sentence at trial. On the other hand, those defendants whose representation costs were higher than $320,000 (the remaining 2/3 of federal capital trials) had only a 19% chance of being sentenced to death. Thus, the study concluded that defendants with low representation costs were more than twice as likely to receive a death sentence.

Office of Defender Services of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, "Update on Cost, Quality, and Availability of Defense Representation in Federal Death Penalty Cases," June 2008; prepared by Jon Gould and Lisa Greenman.

- The average death row prisoner is on death row for 15 years, compared to the average life sentence, which lasts approximately 23 years.

- There is no appeals process for a lifer, as compared to a death row inmate's appeals process, which costs money every single time they appeal.

- Death row prisoners are kept isolated from each other and from the general population, thus costing more money by taking up space.

 

[Vladislak]

Long story short, you rape, murder a family of 4, abuse an animal to bloody hell and back, yada yada yada, you die. I have no sympathy for their wrecked souls that life has condemned upon them.

They choose to act. They know the difference between right and wrong. Period.

Unfortunately, I don't think it's that simple. There have been cases in which people have been given capital punishment, and then years later authorities find out he/she was innocent. Or perhaps that they did only part of the crime (like abused the animal but didn't kill/rape a family of four).

If they were just given life in prison then they could be set free and live the rest of their lives peacefully, but it's kind of hard to release a dead person.

It's just so difficult to determine whether someone is truly guilty of something without a shadow of a doubt. People can be framed or falsely accused, evidence can be tampered with. It may or may not happen very often, but it's entirely possible.

 

[Bun]

If they were just given life in prison then they could be set free and live the rest of their lives peacefully, but it's kind of hard to release a dead person.

I'm not saying I'm for capital punishment, but finding the money to fund prisons is extremely ridiculous when you actually look at it. That's your money going to keep a convicted felon alive and in that facility (for however long). Is that really something we want to be spending our money on?

It's just so difficult to determine whether someone is truly guilty of something without a shadow of a doubt. People can be framed or falsely accused, evidence can be tampered with. It may or may not happen very often, but it's entirely possible.

Indeed. I agree with you here, but then again our forensic sciences are rapidly growing, making it easier to pinpoint these things. We've got some seriously talented people putting together the pieces to solve these puzzles, and although it may not always work, the court/trial process is an extremely long and arduous one. Some people don't seem to realize that, for the most part, these cases don't get resolved in one day; especially if they involve things like murder.

It's a shame when someone innocent does get convicted, though. I'd be interested in seeing the numbers on how much that actually happens.

 

[CassinoChips]

I'm not saying I'm for capital punishment, but finding the money to fund prisons is extremely ridiculous when you actually look at it. That's your money going to keep a convicted felon alive and in that facility (for however long). Is that really something we want to be spending our money on?

Read: It costs more of your money to try a capital case, house the prisoner for 15 years, go through the appeals process, and execute a prisoner than it does to give a prisoner a life sentence.

The money agrument is irrelevant.

It's a shame when someone innocent does get convicted, though. I'd be interested in seeing the numbers on how much that actually happens.

Once is too many. There have been 135 overturned cases in 26 states since 1973.

 

[Bun]

I wasn't trying to compare the two, if that's what you thought. Sorry if I was unclear in my argument. Honestly, there wasn't even really much of an argument to begin with. What I was saying really was more like overall. We don't always execute every prisoner. And what I was thinking more of was like those prisoners who get a very long sentence, consecutive sentences, repeat offenders who just end up back in prison, etc. We don't really do a very good job of putting our money in places that help these people, but rather, we just incarcerate them and then when they get out we expect them to have "learned their lesson". Sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't. But that repetitiveness is what is costing us so much time, effort and finances (again, not comparing the two; just saying we should reconsider how we deal with our system here. both ways are costly, its just that one is more expensive than the other)

however, if i were to choose, i'd rather someone be locked up or our tax dollars used not to fund certain aspects, so on and so forth.

 

[blakstang98]

Ok so this is what I don't understand. Why is it that a trial for death row is so much more expensive than a sentence trial? I mean, a trial is a damn trial. I'd hate to go into politics about this, but in all likelyhood, this just seems to be another black hole that our money gets wrapped up into.

Another thing I don't understand is why death row is so long? I'm guessing this is for appeals and such, but it's still way too long. I mean, so we're basically spending our money to basically keep a prisoner on death row, which is no different then having a person serve their life sentence and then executing them.

And maybe I'm a cold-hearted bastard or I'm twisted, but hey, if they execute them after they're tried and found guilty, then they won't do further research to find out the person was innocent. What they don't know won't hurt them. Yes, a sick and twisted outlook on it, but this isn't something I fight for or protest, so don't take it totally serious. I'm just looking at the realistic point of view.

 

[CassinoChips]

Ok so this is what I don't understand. Why is it that a trial for death row is so much more expensive than a sentence trial? I mean, a trial is a damn trial. I'd hate to go into politics about this, but in all likelyhood, this just seems to be another black hole that our money gets wrapped up into.

It's a lot of reasons.

Firstly and arguably most importantly, the vast majority of defendants in capital murder trials can't afford to hire their own attorneys, so the state provides them one at the taxpayer's expense.

Secondly, capital trials are usually more complex. Expert witnesses have to be called in as far as forensics, defendant's mental health, etc. Again at the taxpayer's expense.

Capital trials are longer. Generally in the area of 4 times as long. Everything has to be nailed down if you want to take someone's life. Nailed down at the taxpayer's expense.

Jury selection process is longer, again because it's a capital trial it carries an extra load on people's minds, and lawyers are much more selective in who is in the jury.

Another thing I don't understand is why death row is so long? I'm guessing this is for appeals and such, but it's still way too long. I mean, so we're basically spending our money to basically keep a prisoner on death row, which is no different then having a person serve their life sentence and then executing them.

It's gotten longer over the years. The appeals process is basically a way to insure due process. It gives the prisoner/his lawyer the chance to go over the court proceedings and look for errors in the case, or missing evidence, or anything else to prove their innocence and/or disprove their guilt.

And maybe I'm a cold-hearted bastard or I'm twisted, but hey, if they execute them after they're tried and found guilty, then they won't do further research to find out the person was innocent. What they don't know won't hurt them. Yes, a sick and twisted outlook on it, but this isn't something I fight for or protest, so don't take it totally serious. I'm just looking at the realistic point of view.

Except that we know it's already happened. Numerous times. If we did it that way, it'd be like the government standing up and shouting "WE DON'T MAKE MISTAKES. EVER. NOT EVEN ONE." In some cases, no one is "digging" for evidence to exonerate the executed. It just is happened across for whatever reason. Nothing you can do at that point except say "Oops." Had it been a life sentence, the prisoner could be released and given a shot at putting their life back together.

 

[M1ghty Mous3]

Unfortunately, I don't think it's that simple. There have been cases in which people have been given capital punishment, and then years later authorities find out he/she was innocent. Or perhaps that they did only part of the crime (like abused the animal but didn't kill/rape a family of four).

If they were just given life in prison then they could be set free and live the rest of their lives peacefully, but it's kind of hard to release a dead person.

It's just so difficult to determine whether someone is truly guilty of something without a shadow of a doubt. People can be framed or falsely accused, evidence can be tampered with. It may or may not happen very often, but it's entirely possible.

I guess i wasn't clear. I understand that some people on death row are innocent, humans make mistakes (do not confuse this with murder). However i was mainly speaking about the people who actually commit these crimes and are guilty. Sorry for the confusion

 

[Linnaete]

I hate these sort of issues, but I'll have a go at voicing my opinion anyway. I personally support the capital punishment- but not completely wholeheartedly. I believe that capital punishment should only be used when the convicted is clearly an extreme danger (e.g. a serial killer and child rapist at same time), when there is irrefutable evidence that this person is guilty. Another time when it should be used is when it is a last resort- such as when police are faced with terrorists hell-bent on genocide.

I don't support it completely wholeheartedly because like everything, the death penalty is no perfect method. As mentioned already, some people have been killed by mistake in various countries. Look at the tragic case of Jean Charles Mendez- an innocent Brazilian native commuter in London that was mistaken for an Islamist bomber and shot in a train. This probably isn't a very good example, but you get my point.

However, I do believe that having the death penalty can help reduce crime. Think about it- would someone be so less hesitant and ready to commit murder if he/she realises the price behind it? I believe so. It is a medium to help intimidate and drive some people against murdering others for whatever trivial reasons they have. I am in Britain now, a country where the jails are so comfortable that inmates describe it as a "permanent holiday". They have luxuries in there fit for kings: plasma TVs, pool tables, games consoles, buffet meals- heck, I bet there's even a swimming pool somewhere! Think about the child killers that would be in these prisons, having the time of their lives while the majority of the decent, law-abiding population MUST fork out money to fund these kind of absurdities! I feel sick to the stomach, knowing that I must pay money for some child killer and his paradise, when:

1)That sort of person is technically NOT facing justice at all. Just a vacation as they call it. It is an insult to the dead victims and their families.

2)Prisons have the kind of luxuries that many, who are hard working and law abiding, do not have.

This is not justice! Life sentences mean nothing here! Someone can just walk free after whatever the number of years, and repeat their offence(s)! If they are killed, they can't be a danger ever again!