Capital Punishment

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Well why do Liberals trust Govt with heath care?
and why do Conservatives trust Govt with military spending unquestioned and unchecked?

Some things government does very well, other things not so well. The military falls in the first category.

The problem I have with the government executing people is the state runs the prosecution from arrest to the carrying out of sentences. Prosecutors pursue perfect conviction records meaning they are determined not to get to the truth, but to get the conviction. Every time. Putting the state in charge of killing somebody they set up to be convicted regardless of actual guilt to begin with comes very close to state sanctioned murder.

Deprived of the ability to kill the people it convicts, there is time to find the truth and have the conviction overturned. This happens a lot, especially with people who were convicted based on eyewitness account but exonerated by DNA evidence.

There are quite a few people who were found to be innocent. Why anyone thinks executing people is worth the risk, I don't know. Just blood thirsty people I guess. Killing is killing, IMO. I don't want my taxpayer dollars going to kill people who are no longer a threat to society. It's stupid, wasteful and barbaric.

I don't think someone who has committed a capital crime is ever "no longer a threat to society".

Just because they are sent to prison does not mean they cannot commit assaults or even murder. The Texas 7 for example.

Also, the most violent criminals often victimize other inmates and prison staff.

ANY prisoner can turn violent at any time. Poor rationalization. Face facts, the DP serves no real purpose except revenge.

It serves the same purpose as flushing a toilet. There is no reason for excrement if it can be eliminated.

And I guess the few that were wrongfully convicted are collateral damage? It seems you're admitting you just want to kill people when it isn't necessary.

 

[Muhammed]

That's another good point. Polls show that Americans' trust in their government is at an all time low but we trust them with power of life and death over people? It makes no sense. I wouldn't trust the government to watch my kids or balance my checkbook much less killing people.

Well why do Liberals trust Govt with heath care?
and why do Conservatives trust Govt with military spending unquestioned and unchecked?

Some things government does very well, other things not so well. The military falls in the first category.

The problem I have with the government executing people is the state runs the prosecution from arrest to the carrying out of sentences. Prosecutors pursue perfect conviction records meaning they are determined not to get to the truth, but to get the conviction. Every time. Putting the state in charge of killing somebody they set up to be convicted regardless of actual guilt to begin with comes very close to state sanctioned murder.

Deprived of the ability to kill the people it convicts, there is time to find the truth and have the conviction overturned. This happens a lot, especially with people who were convicted based on eyewitness account but exonerated by DNA evidence.

There are quite a few people who were found to be innocent. Why anyone thinks executing people is worth the risk, I don't know. Just blood thirsty people I guess. Killing is killing, IMO. I don't want my taxpayer dollars going to kill people who are no longer a threat to society. It's stupid, wasteful and barbaric.

I don't think someone who has committed a capital crime is ever "no longer a threat to society".

Just because they are sent to prison does not mean they cannot commit assaults or even murder. The Texas 7 for example.

Also, the most violent criminals often victimize other inmates and prison staff.

ANY prisoner can turn violent at any time. Poor rationalization. Face facts, the DP serves no real purpose except revenge.

People who commit violent crimes tend to commit more violent crimes.

 

[ChrisL]

Well why do Liberals trust Govt with heath care?
and why do Conservatives trust Govt with military spending unquestioned and unchecked?

Some things government does very well, other things not so well. The military falls in the first category.

The problem I have with the government executing people is the state runs the prosecution from arrest to the carrying out of sentences. Prosecutors pursue perfect conviction records meaning they are determined not to get to the truth, but to get the conviction. Every time. Putting the state in charge of killing somebody they set up to be convicted regardless of actual guilt to begin with comes very close to state sanctioned murder.

Deprived of the ability to kill the people it convicts, there is time to find the truth and have the conviction overturned. This happens a lot, especially with people who were convicted based on eyewitness account but exonerated by DNA evidence.

There are quite a few people who were found to be innocent. Why anyone thinks executing people is worth the risk, I don't know. Just blood thirsty people I guess. Killing is killing, IMO. I don't want my taxpayer dollars going to kill people who are no longer a threat to society. It's stupid, wasteful and barbaric.

I don't think someone who has committed a capital crime is ever "no longer a threat to society".

Just because they are sent to prison does not mean they cannot commit assaults or even murder. The Texas 7 for example.

Also, the most violent criminals often victimize other inmates and prison staff.

ANY prisoner can turn violent at any time. Poor rationalization. Face facts, the DP serves no real purpose except revenge.

People who commit violent crimes tend to commit more violent crimes.

That's why we lock them away. It is more expensive and wasteful to execute them because we have an automatic appeals process (which is a GOOD thing), and that is a very thorough process. We try to make sure that we don't execute innocent people, but it still happens all the time because there are human beings who are flawed and prone to error handling these cases, not to mention the downright dishonest prosecutors/judges who will tamper with evidence just to get another notch on their belts.

 

[emilynghiem]

That's another good point. Polls show that Americans' trust in their government is at an all time low but we trust them with power of life and death over people? It makes no sense. I wouldn't trust the government to watch my kids or balance my checkbook much less killing people.

Well why do Liberals trust Govt with heath care?
and why do Conservatives trust Govt with military spending unquestioned and unchecked?

Some things government does very well, other things not so well. The military falls in the first category.

The problem I have with the government executing people is the state runs the prosecution from arrest to the carrying out of sentences. Prosecutors pursue perfect conviction records meaning they are determined not to get to the truth, but to get the conviction. Every time. Putting the state in charge of killing somebody they set up to be convicted regardless of actual guilt to begin with comes very close to state sanctioned murder.

Deprived of the ability to kill the people it convicts, there is time to find the truth and have the conviction overturned. This happens a lot, especially with people who were convicted based on eyewitness account but exonerated by DNA evidence.

There are quite a few people who were found to be innocent. Why anyone thinks executing people is worth the risk, I don't know. Just blood thirsty people I guess. Killing is killing, IMO. I don't want my taxpayer dollars going to kill people who are no longer a threat to society. It's stupid, wasteful and barbaric.

I don't think someone who has committed a capital crime is ever "no longer a threat to society".

Just because they are sent to prison does not mean they cannot commit assaults or even murder. The Texas 7 for example.

Also, the most violent criminals often victimize other inmates and prison staff.

ANY prisoner can turn violent at any time. Poor rationalization. Face facts, the DP serves no real purpose except revenge.

ChrisL
I disagree.
the option of the death penalty can be used as leverage to negotiate cooperation to get life instead.
And there may be some part of the spiritual process of having to come to turns with
life for life. I'd have to ask some of the nun/priest counselors if this death row business
is part of spiritual purgatory and what is the process society has to go through to get past
capital crime and capital punishment. there is a higher process going on, so instead of fighting
to disrupt it, we should figure out how to facilitate healing and prevent crime to prevent killing and executions.

 

[ChrisL]

Well why do Liberals trust Govt with heath care?
and why do Conservatives trust Govt with military spending unquestioned and unchecked?

Some things government does very well, other things not so well. The military falls in the first category.

The problem I have with the government executing people is the state runs the prosecution from arrest to the carrying out of sentences. Prosecutors pursue perfect conviction records meaning they are determined not to get to the truth, but to get the conviction. Every time. Putting the state in charge of killing somebody they set up to be convicted regardless of actual guilt to begin with comes very close to state sanctioned murder.

Deprived of the ability to kill the people it convicts, there is time to find the truth and have the conviction overturned. This happens a lot, especially with people who were convicted based on eyewitness account but exonerated by DNA evidence.

There are quite a few people who were found to be innocent. Why anyone thinks executing people is worth the risk, I don't know. Just blood thirsty people I guess. Killing is killing, IMO. I don't want my taxpayer dollars going to kill people who are no longer a threat to society. It's stupid, wasteful and barbaric.

I don't think someone who has committed a capital crime is ever "no longer a threat to society".

Just because they are sent to prison does not mean they cannot commit assaults or even murder. The Texas 7 for example.

Also, the most violent criminals often victimize other inmates and prison staff.

ANY prisoner can turn violent at any time. Poor rationalization. Face facts, the DP serves no real purpose except revenge.

ChrisL
I disagree.
the option of the death penalty can be used as leverage to negotiate cooperation to get life instead.
And there may be some part of the spiritual process of having to come to turns with
life for life. I'd have to ask some of the nun/priest counselors if this death row business
is part of spiritual purgatory and what is the process society has to go through to get past
capital crime and capital punishment. there is a higher process going on, so instead of fighting
to disrupt it, we should figure out how to facilitate healing and prevent crime to prevent killing and executions.

Yes, it is used for leverage. Good point. As to the other stuff, don't know. I'm not a very "religious" person.

 

[ChrisL]

Well why do Liberals trust Govt with heath care?
and why do Conservatives trust Govt with military spending unquestioned and unchecked?

Some things government does very well, other things not so well. The military falls in the first category.

The problem I have with the government executing people is the state runs the prosecution from arrest to the carrying out of sentences. Prosecutors pursue perfect conviction records meaning they are determined not to get to the truth, but to get the conviction. Every time. Putting the state in charge of killing somebody they set up to be convicted regardless of actual guilt to begin with comes very close to state sanctioned murder.

Deprived of the ability to kill the people it convicts, there is time to find the truth and have the conviction overturned. This happens a lot, especially with people who were convicted based on eyewitness account but exonerated by DNA evidence.

There are quite a few people who were found to be innocent. Why anyone thinks executing people is worth the risk, I don't know. Just blood thirsty people I guess. Killing is killing, IMO. I don't want my taxpayer dollars going to kill people who are no longer a threat to society. It's stupid, wasteful and barbaric.

I don't think someone who has committed a capital crime is ever "no longer a threat to society".

Just because they are sent to prison does not mean they cannot commit assaults or even murder. The Texas 7 for example.

Also, the most violent criminals often victimize other inmates and prison staff.

ANY prisoner can turn violent at any time. Poor rationalization. Face facts, the DP serves no real purpose except revenge.

It serves the same purpose as flushing a toilet. There is no reason for excrement if it can be eliminated.

Allowing the state to kill people is giving them too much power over the citizens, especially considering how shady and crooked they are. The story I just posted above, there was lying and payoffs, all kinds of police misconduct.

 

[emilynghiem]

Well why do Liberals trust Govt with heath care?
and why do Conservatives trust Govt with military spending unquestioned and unchecked?

Some things government does very well, other things not so well. The military falls in the first category.

The problem I have with the government executing people is the state runs the prosecution from arrest to the carrying out of sentences. Prosecutors pursue perfect conviction records meaning they are determined not to get to the truth, but to get the conviction. Every time. Putting the state in charge of killing somebody they set up to be convicted regardless of actual guilt to begin with comes very close to state sanctioned murder.

Deprived of the ability to kill the people it convicts, there is time to find the truth and have the conviction overturned. This happens a lot, especially with people who were convicted based on eyewitness account but exonerated by DNA evidence.

There are quite a few people who were found to be innocent. Why anyone thinks executing people is worth the risk, I don't know. Just blood thirsty people I guess. Killing is killing, IMO. I don't want my taxpayer dollars going to kill people who are no longer a threat to society. It's stupid, wasteful and barbaric.

I don't think someone who has committed a capital crime is ever "no longer a threat to society".

Just because they are sent to prison does not mean they cannot commit assaults or even murder. The Texas 7 for example.

Also, the most violent criminals often victimize other inmates and prison staff.

ANY prisoner can turn violent at any time. Poor rationalization. Face facts, the DP serves no real purpose except revenge.

People who commit violent crimes tend to commit more violent crimes.

Muhammed
if you get to the root of the anger and sickness this can be cured, even if someone is locked up for life.

By not overbooking prisons with nonviolent cases that can be treated,
we can reserve facilities for the truly dangerous people who shouldn't be released
as they are now due to lack of resources and limits to the laws.

If the laws were based on curing criminal sickness, then this could be
medically shown not to be safe to release someone. Similar to how cancer can be detected as deadly.
Criminal illness is like other diseases and can be diagnosed, treated and cured
instead of letting people randomly roam free until something violent happens and someone dies.

That's a terrible way to diagnose sickness, but that's what our system is doing right now.
Just setting itself up to fail, and letting sick people run free until they commit such a violent crime
it can be justified to lock them up or execute them or force them into commitment to mental institutions.

We need to perfect medical diagnosis and cure and quit playing guessing games when public safety is at stake.

 

[ChrisL]

Some things government does very well, other things not so well. The military falls in the first category.

The problem I have with the government executing people is the state runs the prosecution from arrest to the carrying out of sentences. Prosecutors pursue perfect conviction records meaning they are determined not to get to the truth, but to get the conviction. Every time. Putting the state in charge of killing somebody they set up to be convicted regardless of actual guilt to begin with comes very close to state sanctioned murder.

Deprived of the ability to kill the people it convicts, there is time to find the truth and have the conviction overturned. This happens a lot, especially with people who were convicted based on eyewitness account but exonerated by DNA evidence.

There are quite a few people who were found to be innocent. Why anyone thinks executing people is worth the risk, I don't know. Just blood thirsty people I guess. Killing is killing, IMO. I don't want my taxpayer dollars going to kill people who are no longer a threat to society. It's stupid, wasteful and barbaric.

I don't think someone who has committed a capital crime is ever "no longer a threat to society".

Just because they are sent to prison does not mean they cannot commit assaults or even murder. The Texas 7 for example.

Also, the most violent criminals often victimize other inmates and prison staff.

ANY prisoner can turn violent at any time. Poor rationalization. Face facts, the DP serves no real purpose except revenge.

People who commit violent crimes tend to commit more violent crimes.

Muhammed
if you get to the root of the anger and sickness this can be cured, even if someone is locked up for life.

By not overbooking prisons with nonviolent cases that can be treated,
we can reserve facilities for the truly dangerous people who shouldn't be released
as they are now due to lack of resources and limits to the laws.

If the laws were based on curing criminal sickness, then this could be
medically shown not to be safe to release someone. Similar to how cancer can be detected as deadly.
Criminal illness is like other diseases and can be diagnosed, treated and cured
instead of letting people randomly roam free until something violent happens and someone dies.

That's a terrible way to diagnose sickness, but that's what our system is doing right now.
Just setting itself up to fail, and letting sick people run free until they commit such a violent crime
it can be justified to lock them up or execute them or force them into commitment to mental institutions.

We need to perfect medical diagnosis and cure and quit playing guessing games when public safety is at stake.

That's another good point, a lot of times mentally ill people are just thrown into prison with common criminals. They get absolutely no treatment and if they do manage to get some treatment due to their poor behaviors, it's inadequate in most cases.

 

[emilynghiem]

Some things government does very well, other things not so well. The military falls in the first category.

The problem I have with the government executing people is the state runs the prosecution from arrest to the carrying out of sentences. Prosecutors pursue perfect conviction records meaning they are determined not to get to the truth, but to get the conviction. Every time. Putting the state in charge of killing somebody they set up to be convicted regardless of actual guilt to begin with comes very close to state sanctioned murder.

Deprived of the ability to kill the people it convicts, there is time to find the truth and have the conviction overturned. This happens a lot, especially with people who were convicted based on eyewitness account but exonerated by DNA evidence.

There are quite a few people who were found to be innocent. Why anyone thinks executing people is worth the risk, I don't know. Just blood thirsty people I guess. Killing is killing, IMO. I don't want my taxpayer dollars going to kill people who are no longer a threat to society. It's stupid, wasteful and barbaric.

I don't think someone who has committed a capital crime is ever "no longer a threat to society".

Just because they are sent to prison does not mean they cannot commit assaults or even murder. The Texas 7 for example.

Also, the most violent criminals often victimize other inmates and prison staff.

ANY prisoner can turn violent at any time. Poor rationalization. Face facts, the DP serves no real purpose except revenge.

It serves the same purpose as flushing a toilet. There is no reason for excrement if it can be eliminated.

Allowing the state to kill people is giving them too much power over the citizens, especially considering how shady and crooked they are. The story I just posted above, there was lying and payoffs, all kinds of police misconduct.

If you base the standard on consensus, then nobody can manipulate that.
You can't fake a consensus. Only the truth can get people on all sides to agree, and even that is difficult.

the best part, is once consensus is the standard, this serves as prevention.
In order to qualify for consensus as the standard, the parties have to practice it, or it isn't fair to invoke it.

So again, this cuts down on the bullying culture and rewarding people for lying, coercing and otherwise manipulating.
Restorative Justice is based on healing by working on true solutions that satisfy what everyone needs to have closure.

 

[eagle1462010]

What is the Average Cost to House Inmates in Prison

ccording to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons, the average annual cost of incarceration in Federal prisons in 2010 was $28,284 per inmate. That cost is reduced at the Federal Community Corrections Centers; in 2010 the annual cost was $25,838.

Using that data it costs the country about 46 and a half Billion a year to house inmates in the country. approximate.

To execute or not A question of cost - US news - Crime courts NBC News

Money.

Turns out, it is cheaper to imprison killers for life than to execute them, according to a series of recent surveys. Tens of millions of dollars cheaper, politicians are learning, during a tumbling recession when nearly every state faces job cuts and massive deficits.

So an increasing number of them are considering abolishing capital punishment in favor of life imprisonment, not on principle but out of financial necessity.

"It's 10 times more expensive to kill them than to keep them alive," though most Americans believe the opposite, said Donald McCartin, a former California jurist known as "The Hanging Judge of Orange County" for sending nine men to death row.

Deep into retirement, he lost his faith in an eye for an eye and now speaks against it. What changed a mind so set on the ultimate punishment?

'Waste of time and money' California's legendarily slow appeals system, which produces an average wait of nearly 20 years from conviction to fatal injection — the longest in the nation. Of the nine convicted killers McCartin sent to death row, only one has died. Not by execution, but from a heart attack in custody.

"Every one of my cases is bogged up in the appellate system," said McCartin, who retired in 1993 after 15 years on the bench.

"It's a waste of time and money," said the 82-year-old, self-described right-wing Republican whose sonorous voice still commands attention. "The only thing it does is prolong the agony of the victims' families."

 

[Meathead]

And I guess the few that were wrongfully convicted are collateral damage? It seems you're admitting you just want to kill people when it isn't necessary.

Your premise is incorrect. I have never admitted that anyone who was executed was "collateral". That is clearly an false assumption which you would have to prove, and you can't.

There are certainly enough safeguards today, including DNA and endless and often successful appeals processes to prove what is flushed is shit.

 

[eagle1462010]

The High Cost of the Death Penalty

The exorbitant costs of capital punishment are actually making America less safe because badly needed financial and legal resources are being diverted from effective crime fighting strategies. Before the Los Angeles riots, for example, California had little money for innovations like community policing, but was managing to spend an extra $90 million per year on capital punishment. Texas, with over 300 people on death row, is spending an estimated $2.3 million per case, but its murder rate remains one of the highest in the country.

Morally, I'm for the death penalty. I see no reason to keep a Charles Manson, or a Ted Bundy alive after what they did.

But, as another poster has already stated.............it takes too many years and MILLIONS of dollars to execute a prisoner...................It also ties up the court system and leads to increased cost to the Gov'ts and States in the end.

For FISCAL reasons...........I'm against the death penalty.

 

[ChrisL]

There are quite a few people who were found to be innocent. Why anyone thinks executing people is worth the risk, I don't know. Just blood thirsty people I guess. Killing is killing, IMO. I don't want my taxpayer dollars going to kill people who are no longer a threat to society. It's stupid, wasteful and barbaric.

I don't think someone who has committed a capital crime is ever "no longer a threat to society".

Just because they are sent to prison does not mean they cannot commit assaults or even murder. The Texas 7 for example.

Also, the most violent criminals often victimize other inmates and prison staff.

ANY prisoner can turn violent at any time. Poor rationalization. Face facts, the DP serves no real purpose except revenge.

It serves the same purpose as flushing a toilet. There is no reason for excrement if it can be eliminated.

Allowing the state to kill people is giving them too much power over the citizens, especially considering how shady and crooked they are. The story I just posted above, there was lying and payoffs, all kinds of police misconduct.

If you base the standard on consensus, then nobody can manipulate that.
You can't fake a consensus. Only the truth can get people on all sides to agree, and even that is difficult.

the best part, is once consensus is the standard, this serves as prevention.
In order to qualify for consensus as the standard, the parties have to practice it, or it isn't fair to invoke it.

So again, this cuts down on the bullying culture and rewarding people for lying, coercing and otherwise manipulating.
Restorative Justice is based on healing by working on true solutions that satisfy what everyone needs to have closure.

Maybe you could explain what you mean by a consensus a bit more. I am assuming you are referring to a consensus of the people to be anti-DP. Unfortunately, I don't know if that is the case yet here in the US. A lot of people just accept states putting citizens to death. I just feel that once a person is incarcerated, killing them is pretty barbaric, and I'm not comfortable with that kind of power being wielded by the government against citizens. The reason why we have such an appeals process is because mistakes have been made in the past. It's for our own protection, and why the DP takes so long and is so expensive, but some people will complain about that too, although I'm sure they would be grateful for it if it was their own butt on the line. Lol. There is still always going to be prosecutor misconduct though, I think.

 

[alan1]

Hi guys, I am a Scottish student conducting a dissertation on Capital Punishment in the USA, and as part of my research I'm investigating American attitudes towards the punishment. I've created a survey that I would really appreciate anyone to take part in, it only takes a few minutes and will give valuable data for me to use in my study. Thanks for any responses.

US Opinions of Capital Punishment Survey

For me, it is this simple.

If a person murders (for no just cause) or rapes, I want them eliminated from the gene pool. Capital punishment after a fair trial is the best means to accomplish that end.

 

[ChrisL]

The High Cost of the Death Penalty

The exorbitant costs of capital punishment are actually making America less safe because badly needed financial and legal resources are being diverted from effective crime fighting strategies. Before the Los Angeles riots, for example, California had little money for innovations like community policing, but was managing to spend an extra $90 million per year on capital punishment. Texas, with over 300 people on death row, is spending an estimated $2.3 million per case, but its murder rate remains one of the highest in the country.

Morally, I'm for the death penalty. I see no reason to keep a Charles Manson, or a Ted Bundy alive after what they did.

But, as another poster has already stated.............it takes too many years and MILLIONS of dollars to execute a prisoner...................It also ties up the court system and leads to increased cost to the Gov'ts and States in the end.

For FISCAL reasons...........I'm against the death penalty.

I agree up to a point . . . because I am concerned when we find out that a prisoner was innocent all along. Imagine what that must be like, sitting on death row, awaiting execution by your own government and you are innocent. It happens more often than we would like to think too. The Innocence Project is so limited because they have to rely on donations. They are only cracking the surface.

 

[ChrisL]

Hi guys, I am a Scottish student conducting a dissertation on Capital Punishment in the USA, and as part of my research I'm investigating American attitudes towards the punishment. I've created a survey that I would really appreciate anyone to take part in, it only takes a few minutes and will give valuable data for me to use in my study. Thanks for any responses.

US Opinions of Capital Punishment Survey

For me, it is this simple.

If a person murders (for no just cause) or rapes, I want them eliminated from the gene pool. Capital punishment after a fair trial is the best means to accomplish that end.

IF you give rapists the death penalty, then they start killing their victims . . . they have absolutely no motivation to not kill their victims and every motivation to do it.

After all, if the punishment is the same, why leave any witnesses to the crime alive?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

And I guess the few that were wrongfully convicted are collateral damage? It seems you're admitting you just want to kill people when it isn't necessary.

Your premise is incorrect. I have never admitted that anyone who was executed was "collateral". That is clearly an false assumption which you would have to prove, and you can't.

There are certainly enough safeguards today, including DNA and endless and often successful appeals processes to prove what is flushed is shit.

The system will always be flawed because humans are involved. My wife and I are huge NBC Dateline fans. But it distubs me how often juries deliver guilty verdicts based on nothing but circumstantial evidence and these are real life cases we're talking about. I don't blame the jury but I do blame the prosecutors and police who most often go for the closest suspect and latch onto a theory, never looking for another suspect, never questioning whether or not they have the right guy. Like a rhinoceros they set their blurry sights on something and charge. I think innocent people get caught in police crosshairs more than we imagine and the system which we rely on to ensure accurate convictions instead is hard wired to set people up for conviction, guilty or not.

 

[ChrisL]

Well, I think it is a lot more complicated once you start to really think about it, about the implications, etc. It's really not so simple.

 

[alan1]

The High Cost of the Death Penalty

The exorbitant costs of capital punishment are actually making America less safe because badly needed financial and legal resources are being diverted from effective crime fighting strategies. Before the Los Angeles riots, for example, California had little money for innovations like community policing, but was managing to spend an extra $90 million per year on capital punishment. Texas, with over 300 people on death row, is spending an estimated $2.3 million per case, but its murder rate remains one of the highest in the country.

Morally, I'm for the death penalty. I see no reason to keep a Charles Manson, or a Ted Bundy alive after what they did.

But, as another poster has already stated.............it takes too many years and MILLIONS of dollars to execute a prisoner...................It also ties up the court system and leads to increased cost to the Gov'ts and States in the end.

For FISCAL reasons...........I'm against the death penalty.

The solution is to fix the fiscal reasons for your opposition, not to acquiesce to them.

 

[eagle1462010]

The High Cost of the Death Penalty

The exorbitant costs of capital punishment are actually making America less safe because badly needed financial and legal resources are being diverted from effective crime fighting strategies. Before the Los Angeles riots, for example, California had little money for innovations like community policing, but was managing to spend an extra $90 million per year on capital punishment. Texas, with over 300 people on death row, is spending an estimated $2.3 million per case, but its murder rate remains one of the highest in the country.

Morally, I'm for the death penalty. I see no reason to keep a Charles Manson, or a Ted Bundy alive after what they did.

But, as another poster has already stated.............it takes too many years and MILLIONS of dollars to execute a prisoner...................It also ties up the court system and leads to increased cost to the Gov'ts and States in the end.

For FISCAL reasons...........I'm against the death penalty.

I agree up to a point . . . because I am concerned when we find out that a prisoner was innocent all along. Imagine what that must be like, sitting on death row, awaiting execution by your own government and you are innocent. It happens more often than we would like to think too. The Innocence Project is so limited because they have to rely on donations. They are only cracking the surface.

No system is perfect............Innocent people are sometimes hosed over and/or executed for crimes they don't commit..............But I think that error rate is very low.................

Does it happen..........Of course.......................but there can be no doubt in cases like Manson or Bundy............and many other cases are absolutely IRON CLAD..................beyond doubt..............

Either way...............the cost is too high financially to execute...............For that reason I'd agree to do away with it..............and that alone................