<p>Does it cost more to execute a criminal or to keep him/her in prison for life? What's your stance on this?</p>
<p>Well, death penalty trials end up costing more than trials in which the death penalty is not considered. Also, only a small number of dealth penalty trials result in executions. Without all of the red tape, simply executing an inmate is not very expensive.</p>
<p>thanks for the response</p>
<p>And, most inmates who are sentenced to the death penalty wait a good 10+years before it happens. So that's the cost of living plus all the political stuff.</p>
<p>it's only expensive because of all the appeals.</p>
<p>I fully believe in the death penalty, I think criminals get off of it too easily, and I think it should be applied more widely.
I don't think that because a criminal declares that they are guilty that they should automatically be immune from the death penalty.
I also think that we should execute more people per year. In prison, they can do anything they want and they do not deserve to live.
Also it should not be that easy to gain appeals. It just hogs down the process. Sure there are mistakes, but those are an extreme rarity and with ever increasing technology we are lessening the ammount of mistakes in the legal system.</p>
<p>Honestly, I'm for whatever's more economically beneficial, and that depends on both the situation and how popular the case is. I'm as liberal-atheist-scientist as the next but some people simply deserve to die.</p>
<p>
[quote]
some people simply deserve to die.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I know some say capital punishment is not a deterrent to crime, but it's better than having someone sentenced to life in prison, giving up on his life and starts doing **** in prison, making life worse for everyone involved. It should be legal, which it isn't in this criminal-friendly country of Canada.</p>
<p>I'm against capital punishment in every instance, but in favor of life without parole as a substitute. I'm not religious but I think domestic state-sanctioned murder is immoral and counterproductive. Not to mention, the death penalty is the ultimate in biopolitical control, which is no good. :/</p>
<p>The numbers show that the death penalty does not act as a deterrent. The fact of the matter is, murderers/rapists/whatever just don't care or consider the punishment when they commit their crime. States in which the death penalty is legal do not have lower murder rates.</p>
<p>The numbers show that it is more expensive to execute a person than to keep him/her in jail for life. So economically, it makes sense, although I find this to be the least compelling reason.</p>
<p>The numbers also show that a significant percentage of those on death row are actually innocent. The criminal system is somewhat unreliable and indeterminate, and I don't believe in instituting a permanent punishment for a crime that may or may not have been committed.</p>
<p>I realize that I'm making some claims here without evidence, but I'll find these figures sometime else (when it's not 2am) if anybody wants to see them.</p>
<p>The numbers get messed up because of the one problem with our legal system (especially the death penalty cases): The prisoners keep on appealing and appealing and appealing. If they didn't, they yes, death penalty would be more economically beneficial than life in prison, but the reason it is so expensive is because of people like ACLU and Amnesty Int'l.</p>
<p>Capital Punishment: The execution of Stanley "Tookie" Williams</p>
<p>Stanley Williams is no doubt a nefarious figure. He is responsible for a sub-culture of violence that has caused the murders of countless youths, and not just African-Americans. For every Crip who has robbed, killed, terrorized, and wasted their lives participating in gang violence, Stanley Williams is in someway liable; though not completely. While I am not a gang member, I am from the southside of Los Angeles, and I am very familiar with gang culture. Most of these kids are poor, uneducated and misguided, which I think points to a fundamental flaw within our society. How Stanley Williams came to be is no different in that regard. Granted there is no excuse for this kind of behavior, afterall, the murders he was convicted of were committed in cold-blood, and his punishment should fit the crime. However, executing him is not justice. It is revenge. The reason a society is able to condemn a person in the first place is because the collective whole of society is essentially saying that our way of doing things is moral and right, and the criminals way of doing things is immoral and wrong. If we as a society execute (kill) a man as punishment for murder (killing), than we are no better than he is. Again, this is revenge, not justice. We, in-effect, lose the moral high ground. We are reverting to an archaic form of law and order not much different from Hammurabi's Code (An Eye For An Eye). What's next, cutting off a child's hand for stealing? We are supposed to be much more civilized than that. If justice is about revenge, then what do we need cops for, or judges, juries, and courtrooms. We could save millions perhaps billions of dollars a year in judiciary expenditures by simply providing gun and a bullet. Or perhaps we should re-invent the guillotine, and hold public executions. This doesn't sound much different than the way things are done in many countries in the Middle East, the same way of doing things that we are trying to rid the world of. The point is, if we execute murderers, we are no better than they are. If we are no better than they are, then who are we to condemn them in the first place. This "eye for an eye" mantra is one step removed from Anarchy; and if you think Anarchy is cool or somehow acceptable in a civil society, then you are a moron. When a person is convicted for the crimes they commit, it should not go unpunished, but rehabilitation, re-education, and assimilation back into society is the morally just thing to do. If while incarcerated an individual show no signs of true rehabilitation through repeated psychological therapy and evaluation, then he stays in jail. Plain and simple. And none of this T.V. and commisaries, and hanging out with your dumb**** buddies. Prison should be hard time and hard labor, followed by mandatory educational seminars and therapy. Teach them a trade. When a convict is released from prison, why make it easier for them to commit more crimes by making it harder for them to get a job and make a different society. This is the United States of America, not Saudi-<strong><em>ing Arabia. We're better than that. We are more civilized and just than that. Otherwise what the hell are we fighting wars for. It's not just about defending our country from terrorism, those idiots aren't capable of defeating us. This war is about our civilized and just way of life, versus their backwards dip</em></strong> way of life. It's about showing these poor and uneducated Middle East masses that there is hope for a better future if they would only recognize how it is done. Anyway, I digress. Stanley "Tookie" Williams should not be executed, he should instead be forced to dedicating the rest of his life to reverse the damage he has done. This is civility, this is justice, this is what America should be all about.</p>
<p>Any takers?</p>
<p>That article is journalistic cheese nothing less:)</p>
<p>The death penalty and the entire prison system is an issue that I differ greatly on with the Republican party's views. With DNA evidence, and huge expense of death penalty cases, there is simply no reason for the death penalty anymore. There should also not be any "mandatory minimum sentences" for any cases. Why do we elect judges? Do they even have any discretion(sp?) anymore? The prison system was supposed to rehabilitate. It does not do this. The current system is set up to punish, nothing more. When the majority of your prisoners are on the inside for simple drug possesion and other non violent offenses, something is terribly wrong.</p>
<p>Capital punishment, for the right reasons, I'm all for it.</p>
<p>Murder - you purposefully deprive someone of their right to life, you have none of your own. And no, I don't think we should spend lots of tax dollars to pay 7 guards apiece to feed them for the rest of their lifes in a dank cell they might escape out of.</p>
<p>me too sweetest</p>
<p>"The numbers show that it is more expensive to execute a person than to keep him/her in jail for life. So economically, it makes sense, although I find this to be the least compelling reason."</p>
<p>yeah i find this hard to believe...you can kill someone with a bullet and they only cost 7 cents...yet u want to feed people for years and house them??? Yes please find something to back up ur crap</p>
<p>"There should also not be any "mandatory minimum sentences" for any cases. Why do we elect judges? Do they even have any discretion(sp?) anymore?"</p>
<p>Because, as you probably know not all judges are the smartest ppl in the world and they would let off ppl too easily especially the liberal goofs</p>
<p>"you can kill someone with a bullet and they only cost 7 cents...yet u want to feed people for years and house them?"</p>
<p>This is the 21st century buddy; you can't just kill someone with a bullet. Even the guiltiest criminals deserve a fair trial and have the right to appeal.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Sure there are mistakes, but those are an extreme rarity and with ever increasing technology we are lessening the ammount of mistakes in the legal system.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>One mistake is one too many.</p>
<p>I basically agree with UCLAri.</p>
<p>"The numbers also show that a significant percentage of those on death row are actually innocent. The criminal system is somewhat unreliable and indeterminate, and I don't believe in instituting a permanent punishment for a crime that may or may not have been committed."</p>
<p>EXACTLY. If you are okay with capital punishment, you are therefore OKAY WITH KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE. It's as simple as that. There was just a case of this the other day, a man executed decades ago was found to be innocent. Mind you, it's getting better with the testing, but as uclari said, one slip up means one innocent death.</p>