|
Post by cambygsp on May 4, 2007 4:40:07 GMT -5
The state put another prisoner to death last night, I think I read that he was on death row for like 22 years.
I would sure think a fella that has served 22 years with no possibility of ever getting out, would look forward to death.
The 22 years on death row would be worse than the death itself.
Why does it take so long to put a prisoner to death, don't you think 22 years is a bit exsessive?
Wonder what this case has cost us taxpayers, the trial itself, 22 years of housing the guy in prison, the legal work and then giving him the overdose and I bet we pay for the funeral too.
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on May 4, 2007 5:12:57 GMT -5
Why does it take so long to put a prisoner to death, don't you think 22 years is a bit exsessive? Wonder what this case has cost us taxpayers, the trial itself, 22 years of housing the guy in prison, the legal work and then giving him the overdose and I bet we pay for the funeral too. It's probably a good thing that the process takes so long--if the case is appealed and ruled in the favor of the state over and over again over a number of years, I'd imagine that there is a lesser chance that the wrong person will be charged with the crime and be put to death. This is not a mistake the state can afford to make, so the extra "checks and balances" over the years might be a good thing, even if it is costly to keep them on death row. It would be more costly to give them a life sentence, I suppose...
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on May 4, 2007 6:59:21 GMT -5
The anti's would tell you different; supposedly it is more costly to execute one. I don't know how true that is, but it wouldn't suprise me.
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on May 4, 2007 7:18:11 GMT -5
The anti's would tell you different; supposedly it is more costly to execute one. I don't know how true that is, but it wouldn't suprise me. Me neither!
|
|
|
Post by tenring on May 4, 2007 7:29:10 GMT -5
I can remember reading several times, it is cheaper to keep them for life than to whack 'um. The only reason that makes sense to do away with the death penalty!
|
|
|
Post by raporter on May 4, 2007 7:44:35 GMT -5
I am definately pro death penalty. However after watching the shows on the SuperMax prisons where they are in windowless cells for 23 hours each day with no intermingling with other prisoners. I believe death would be welcomed after a few years of this.
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on May 4, 2007 7:59:45 GMT -5
I can remember reading several times, it is cheaper to keep them for life than to whack 'um. I wonder if this is something the anti's like to say to advance their agenda, or if it is a factual observation based logically on actual data...
|
|
|
Post by swilk on May 4, 2007 8:17:59 GMT -5
In clear cut cases ..... there is nothing cheaper than taking them out back and putting a .22 behind the right ear.
|
|
|
Post by lefty on May 4, 2007 8:18:00 GMT -5
Two choices:
Regular or Crispy........... Fry em'
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on May 4, 2007 8:40:04 GMT -5
Two choices: Regular or Crispy........... Fry em' LOL--your screen name is misleading on this issue!!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on May 4, 2007 9:38:47 GMT -5
Execution is more expensive BECAUSE of the length of the process and the additional court time it inevetably involves.
I have a rather od/different way of looking at the death penalty.
I totally oppose it for first-time offenders - regardless of the "heinousness" of the crime - and oppose it for reasons mentioned.
Essentially, anybody can get set up, freak out, manifest a genuine treatable mental illness, etc. One incident does not make a person a perpetual danger to society, and if, in the case of a setup/false arrest/false ID, executing an innocent is absolutely unacceptable.
OTOH, I'm 100% for the immediate execution of any and all recidivist violent offenders. By their multiple actions and multiple convictions they have PROVEN themselves to be incorrigible, perpetual cancers on the body politic and should be excised.
People don't get set up multiple times. People with treatable/treated illnesses don't reoffend.
That's not to say that 1st time offenders shouldn't be punished - even severely - but if we were to get rid of all the recividists there would be plenty of room/money to attempt to treat/rehabilitate them, rather than just train them to BECOME recidivists.
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on May 4, 2007 10:15:08 GMT -5
Very thought provoking & interesting perspective OI. I still have to go with the death penalty be it a single, or multiple offender.
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on May 4, 2007 10:24:37 GMT -5
Execution is more expensive BECAUSE of the length of the process and the additional court time it inevetably involves. I have a rather od/different way of looking at the death penalty. I totally oppose it for first-time offenders - regardless of the "heinousness" of the crime - and oppose it for reasons mentioned. Essentially, anybody can get set up, freak out, manifest a genuine treatable mental illness, etc. One incident does not make a person a perpetual danger to society, and if, in the case of a setup/false arrest/false ID, executing an innocent is absolutely unacceptable. OTOH, I'm 100% for the immediate execution of any and all recidivist violent offenders. By their multiple actions and multiple convictions they have PROVEN themselves to be incorrigible, perpetual cancers on the body politic and should be excised. People don't get set up multiple times. People with treatable/treated illnesses don't reoffend. That's not to say that 1st time offenders shouldn't be punished - even severely - but if we were to get rid of all the recividists there would be plenty of room/money to attempt to treat/rehabilitate them, rather than just train them to BECOME recidivists. I thought it was not allowable to sentence someone to death if they are found to have a treatable mental illness (or successfully plead "insanity" at the time the offense was committed), regardless of how many prior offenses the person had committed...please correct me if I am wrong! (The only exception that I know if is Antisocial Personality Disorder...to my knowledge you can not plead "insanity" on the basis of ANPD, because this is one of the ways society is protected from these individuals.)
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on May 4, 2007 10:32:07 GMT -5
I'm a supporter of the death penalty.
I also feel that the wait between judgment and execution is absolutely absurd. I'd give it a year, max, unless a petition was filed with good reasons to extend it. If the person on death row can't be proven to have been wrongly convicted during that time, they're not going to be.
And I think we need to take a more realistic look at the alternatives. Putting a murderer to death is not an action without other consequences. There are effects, both positive and negative, on the others affected by that particular crime, others who might do similar crimes, and our society as a whole.
The other side gets good press in expounding the negative aspects, such as the rare occasion when someone on death row is spared because of information that arises long afterwards. That does happen, but the number of times it has freed a truly innocent person are extremely rare.
Compare that to the number of times a murderer has escaped or been paroled only to kill more innocent victims, or the number of times prison employees have been killed by people who should have danced at the end of a rope years earlier.
Do those additional victims count for anything? If we are to have an imperfect system, and we're doomed to that status, let's have one that protects that far larger number of innocent victims of escaped or paroled or otherwise wrongly freed killers, rather than the extremely rare person wrongfully put to death legally.
Both victims are victims of the system. We kill innocent people when we turn loose killers who will likely repeat their former behavior, just as surely as when we actually execute the wrong person for a murder. Either mistake is terrible and something to strive to eliminate. But to eliminate the more rare error by increasing the more common is not a sane solution to anything.
|
|
|
Post by indianahick on May 4, 2007 10:44:02 GMT -5
I can see not putting someone to death for a crime of passion (heat of the moment) argument. Then again take some one like Son of Sam, Dalmer, Bundy, serial murderers, then the death penalty should take precedence. I believe that the anti's are correct that it costs more to kill a murderer than give them life sentences. Both for the convicted and the states. Lawyers, fees and other legal fees. Maybe though in the long run it would be better to build more of the single, windowless 7 X 9 foot cell prisons and keep them caged for 23 hours a day and only showers twice a week. Separate exercise areas.
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on May 4, 2007 10:51:09 GMT -5
Oh, and I'd much rather have "victims" do the executing... at the time of the crime. No mistaken identity then...
drg: it all ties back into that mish-mash that we have for "adjudicating" people. I fear that it is likely that there have been/will be people who are genuinely ill who don't get diagnosed until after sentencing.
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on May 4, 2007 11:49:41 GMT -5
drg: it all ties back into that mish-mash that we have for "adjudicating" people. I fear that it is likely that there have been/will be people who are genuinely ill who don't get diagnosed until after sentencing. Probably true...I wonder how much bearing the state places on a diagnosis happening after the sentencing in an appeal, proven the person's symptoms were significant in his or her criminal behavior leading to the conviction?
|
|
|
Post by retnuhreed on May 4, 2007 16:00:59 GMT -5
I am against. It does not deter crime and it costs tax payers more money. I think it would be a far worse punishment to sit in prison for life, rather then take the easy way out. Also, when you have the death penalty. society risks murdering an innocent person.
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on May 5, 2007 1:24:21 GMT -5
Boy, I'm a true beleiver in an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Taking someones innocent life should mean you forfeit yours!
Some of these fellas live pretty comfortable in prison, I know I couldnt but for some if fits them just fine.
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on May 5, 2007 2:31:59 GMT -5
Some of these fellas live pretty comfortable in prison, I know I couldnt but for some if fits them just fine. Right you are Camby! Look at that videotape of Richard Speck that got out several years ago..... That guy was a monster and seemed to be loving (literally) every minute of his time in a Supermax prison. Execute them within 1 year of the original ruling.
|
|