Death Penalty: Does your country have it?

[Azuren]

scrapking said:

Azuren said:
I live in the US, specifically in Texas. Unsurprisingly, I support my country's use of the death penalty. There are some out there who are just not worth trying to save (like the guy who repeatedly slammed a 5 month old infant against the sidewalk... Fuck 65 years, just kill him).

Keeping a person incarcerated is expensive, and I'd rather not have my tax dollars feed and clothe monsters that I would personally pass the death sentence on.

I don't find it necessarily unsurprising that you support the death penalty.  I live in British Columbia, but don't believe in cutting down old growth forests, not everyone who lives in Washington State wears socks and sandals, not everyone who lives in Alberta believes in destroying their province by exploiting the oil sands, etc.  The world is full of amazing diversity.  :)

Keeping a person incarcerated is cheap compared to keeping someone in a death row institution.  The last time I saw statistics, California paid an average of $308 million for every person they murdered on death row (taking death row costs divided by the number of people actually murdered).  The death row institutions are vastly more expensive than other prisons, the legal costs are far more expensive as a free and fair society generally doesn't want to murder its citizens without letting them exhaust all legal means to protest their innocence, etc.  Death row is about a public's desire for vengeance, not against responsible management of public finances.  Unless you want a guilty-until-proven-innocent kangaroo court, a system where some people are ultimately murdered on behalf of the public will always cost more than locking people up and throwing away the key.

Then there are the postumous pardons as new evidence comes to light, which has been common in recent years with new DNA evidence.  No system of murdering people is perfect, to murder anyone you have to accept that some innocent people will be murdered.  I don't accept that.

Finally, whatever happened to two wrongs don't make a right?  One of the first lessons most of us learn as children.  I'm often amazed that those who believe "Thou shalt not kill" seem to not apply it to the government murdering on their behalf.  It's not "Thous shalt not kill...  unless they do something you strongly disagree with, and then it's cool."

EDIT TO ADD:  If anything, the fact that the death penalty is ruinously bad for public finances, I might expect someone from Texas to be deeply concerned about that.  Texas' reputation is both fiscal conservative (save money), and socially conservative (which is where "thou shalt not kill" should be kicking in).  I know that a lot of Texans seem to support the death penalty, but that seems wildly anachronistic to their other beliefs.  Perhaps there isn't a lot of education in Texas as to the true nature of the death penalty.  *shrug*

1. Don't compare Texas finance to Californian finance. Californians are total numbskulls with their money, that's why they're all moving to Texas (go home, by the way, Californians; you're ruining this state, too). As far as keeping prisoners sentenced to death, Texas actually attempted (may have succeeded, I dunno) to pass a law stating that if there are more than three credible eye witnesses (cops, lawyers, teachers, etc) then your ass is grass. Texas doesn't want to spend money on the scum of society, and fast-tracking monsters to a lethal injection would save enough money in the long run to give 2 people full time jobs for life at 30K a year and still save money.

 

2. No one is talking about a death sentence for people where there is reasonable doubt. Heavy sentences are reserved for those, death is for those who are not worth keeping. So before you attempt to bring it up again, no one is wanting to sentence someone to death unless it was practically recorded. 

 

3. You also seem to be under the impression that this is simply a form of punishment. This is a removal of dangerous elements. For example, let's say we catch a terrorist after he kills 20 people. Throughout trial, he claims he is justified and admits to the murders. If you, for a second, think he deserves anything less than an immediate death sentence, then I call your reasoning into question. If he goes to jail for life, there's still a possibility he could get out. And what would he do if he did? Buy puppies for an orphanage, or kill more people?