By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - VGC Debate/Poll: The Death Penalty

akuma587 on 18 January 2009
elprincipe said:
For those of you who seem to think it's cheaper to execute someone (as if that is a reasonable argument anyway), here's what you need to know: it's not. Read here:

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

The main reason it costs more is because of court costs, which are astronomical because of the exhaustive appeals process demanded by the death penalty. You could argue that we should streamline the appeals process, but that is a decidedly uncomfortable argument for most since we already have had people freed from death row due to new evidence (or reexamination of DNA evidence) proving them innocent.

What he said.  It is more expensive for this reason.  The system gives people who are sentenced to death a great deal of due process (which they should).  I wouldn't want to live in a society that didn't take the death penalty extremely seriously if it chooses to use it.

At least in Texas they have figured out that it is easier (and more efficient) just to appeal death penalty cases directly to the Texas Supreme Court.

So all you death penalty proponents are costing me money!

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Around the Network
Tyrannical on 18 January 2009
elprincipe said:
For those of you who seem to think it's cheaper to execute someone (as if that is a reasonable argument anyway), here's what you need to know: it's not. Read here:

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

The main reason it costs more is because of court costs, which are astronomical because of the exhaustive appeals process demanded by the death penalty. You could argue that we should streamline the appeals process, but that is a decidedly uncomfortable argument for most since we already have had people freed from death row due to new evidence (or reexamination of DNA evidence) proving them innocent.

This is just another one of the anti-death penalty lies. Don't be fooled by them.

They wouldn't let you execute someone caught red handed, on tape, with 50 eye witnesses,and DNA evidence,  and a signed confession without the same length appeal.

It is more expensive because the death penalty opponents made it that way. They added unnecessary apeals and processes for the purpose of making the death penalty too expensive.

They just love to talk about cherry picked cases where "oh noes, he could be innocent" and never the cases where the amount of evidence is 100%. How about those we hang those 100% guilties within two weeks of the guilty verdict?



Yet, today, America's leaders are reenacting every folly that brought these great powers [Russia, Germany, and Japan] to ruin -- from arrogance and hubris, to assertions of global hegemony, to imperial overstretch, to trumpeting new 'crusades,' to handing out war guarantees to regions and countries where Americans have never fought before. We are piling up the kind of commitments that produced the greatest disasters of the twentieth century.
 — Pat Buchanan – A Republic, Not an Empire

akuma587 on 18 January 2009
Tyrannical said:
elprincipe said:
For those of you who seem to think it's cheaper to execute someone (as if that is a reasonable argument anyway), here's what you need to know: it's not. Read here:

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

The main reason it costs more is because of court costs, which are astronomical because of the exhaustive appeals process demanded by the death penalty. You could argue that we should streamline the appeals process, but that is a decidedly uncomfortable argument for most since we already have had people freed from death row due to new evidence (or reexamination of DNA evidence) proving them innocent.

This is just another one of the anti-death penalty lies. Don't be fooled by them.

They wouldn't let you execute someone caught red handed, on tape, with 50 eye witnesses,and DNA evidence,  and a signed confession without the same length appeal.

It is more expensive because the death penalty opponents made it that way. They added unnecessary apeals and processes for the purpose of making the death penalty too expensive.

They just love to talk about cherry picked cases where "oh noes, he could be innocent" and never the cases where the amount of evidence is 100%. How about those we hang those 100% guilties within two weeks of the guilty verdict?

Do you live in the same country I do?  The appeals system is one of the best features of our judicial system.  Ask any appeals judge and they completely support that a prisoner sentenced to death is able to appeal the decision.  It would be a mockery of justice if we didn't let them. 

Its a constitutionally protected right:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

I seriously hope you get arrested at some point in your life and the prosecutor decides to throw the book at you.  



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

elprincipe on 18 January 2009
Tyrannical said:
elprincipe said:
For those of you who seem to think it's cheaper to execute someone (as if that is a reasonable argument anyway), here's what you need to know: it's not. Read here:

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

The main reason it costs more is because of court costs, which are astronomical because of the exhaustive appeals process demanded by the death penalty. You could argue that we should streamline the appeals process, but that is a decidedly uncomfortable argument for most since we already have had people freed from death row due to new evidence (or reexamination of DNA evidence) proving them innocent.

This is just another one of the anti-death penalty lies. Don't be fooled by them.

They wouldn't let you execute someone caught red handed, on tape, with 50 eye witnesses,and DNA evidence,  and a signed confession without the same length appeal.

It is more expensive because the death penalty opponents made it that way. They added unnecessary apeals and processes for the purpose of making the death penalty too expensive.

They just love to talk about cherry picked cases where "oh noes, he could be innocent" and never the cases where the amount of evidence is 100%. How about those we hang those 100% guilties within two weeks of the guilty verdict?

Well, since we have, as I stated in the earlier post, freed a fair number of people off of death row because new evidence was found proving them innocent, I'm not sure I share your description of "unnecessary appeals and processss."  If, after all these "unnecessary" things, we have still found innocent people guilty, I'm certainly not for reducing or eliminating them, unless you have a more foolproof system, which I doubt.

You are certainly not a lawyer if you think it's that simple, having a lot of "100% guilty" cases (disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer either).  Did you know sometimes people confess to crimes they didn't commit?  Perhaps police were able to extract a confession under interrogation from someone who didn't commit the crime?  It has happened, you know.  It's happened many times.  Under your system those innocent (maybe stupid/naive/whatever, but innocent) people are put to death.  Where is the justice in that?

Personally, not even taking into account my moral objection to government putting people to death, I would prefer to keep a million guilty people alive behind bars than to have any reasonable chance of executing an innocent person.

 



In Memoriam RVW Jr.

SSBB Friend Code = 5455-9050-8670 (PM me if you add so I can add you!) 

Tetris Party Friend Code = 116129046416 (ditto)

Tyrannical on 18 January 2009

So, say if someone commited murder during a botched robbery, was on video tape commiting the murder, identified by 50 eye witnesses, and was arrested at the scene with the murder weapon.

How many appeals would that person need? Or could you simple carry out the death sentence two weeks after the conviction?



Yet, today, America's leaders are reenacting every folly that brought these great powers [Russia, Germany, and Japan] to ruin -- from arrogance and hubris, to assertions of global hegemony, to imperial overstretch, to trumpeting new 'crusades,' to handing out war guarantees to regions and countries where Americans have never fought before. We are piling up the kind of commitments that produced the greatest disasters of the twentieth century.
 — Pat Buchanan – A Republic, Not an Empire

Around the Network
akuma587 on 18 January 2009
Tyrannical said:
So, say if someone commited murder during a botched robbery, was on video tape commiting the murder, identified by 50 eye witnesses, and was arrested at the scene with the murder weapon.

How many appeals would that person need? Or could you simple carry out the death sentence two weeks after the conviction?

1) In many states that would not qualify as capital murder, so it wouldn't even be a crime that someone could receive the death sentence for.

2) You are completely oversimplifying the evidentiary process.  95% of murders have far less evidence than what you just stated. You are looking at every situation assuming that murders are an open and shut case.

The world or ANY crime is not just:

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Commando on 18 January 2009

OK their are some good points here. My only question with the court cost thing, is hou is the court proceedings more costly in a conviction of Capitol Punishment as opposed to Life imprissionment.

I mean I guess I'm asking how could killing someone in the end rather than leaving them in jail somehow make the trials and appeals (that have already happened) cost more.

To me it's like your saying, You bought a Wii for $250, Extra Wii-mote for $50, 4 games for $40 each so you have done spent $380, right. Then when the Conduit comes out for $50, and it is determined that it is all that and it's worth $60, and the Wii is bieng heralded as better than PS3 by , I dunno, peoples. So the price getes jacked up and you tell me that my Wii therefore is more costly than a PS3.

Thats what its like to me, how could that last thing chronologically change the data concerning what preceds it.



"Let justice be done though the heavens fall." - Jim Garrison

"Ask not your horse, if ye should ride into battle" - myself

Tyrannical on 18 January 2009
akuma587 said:
Tyrannical said:
So, say if someone commited murder during a botched robbery, was on video tape commiting the murder, identified by 50 eye witnesses, and was arrested at the scene with the murder weapon.

How many appeals would that person need? Or could you simple carry out the death sentence two weeks after the conviction?

1) In many states that would not qualify as capital murder, so it wouldn't even be a crime that someone could receive the death sentence for.

2) You are completely oversimplifying the evidentiary process.  95% of murders have far less evidence than what you just stated. You are looking at every situation assuming that murders are an open and shut case.

The world or ANY crime is not just:

 

 (Black or White)

So?

Let's talk about the 5% that are open and shut cases. How about the death penalty two weeks after conviction for them? 

 



Yet, today, America's leaders are reenacting every folly that brought these great powers [Russia, Germany, and Japan] to ruin -- from arrogance and hubris, to assertions of global hegemony, to imperial overstretch, to trumpeting new 'crusades,' to handing out war guarantees to regions and countries where Americans have never fought before. We are piling up the kind of commitments that produced the greatest disasters of the twentieth century.
 — Pat Buchanan – A Republic, Not an Empire

mrstickball on 18 January 2009

Kind of anti (radical change from last year).

I'm learning that if I am indeed pro-life for unborn babies, I must also be for those that truly don't deserve life too...Even if they've made their decision to be the worst people on the face of the planet.

Having said that, though, our prison system needs majorly re-vamped to include more strict & severe punishments. Criminals commit crimes because the deterrent prison provides is not sufficient. Some argue that the death penalty is a good deterrent...But I'd argue that (some seek death, sadly enough).

Forced labor, or other practices would be a good start - Force those in the prison system to pay for their crimes by doing labor that'd re-coup their living expenses as well as victim's benefits. Make criminals understand that there are far better places to go in life than a prison. Make prison the most inhospitable place for criminals that have done horrible things (of course, not as bad for those convicted of lesser crimes).

Of course, that's all IMO, and there are too many sides for it. Ultimately, I don't think we should sanction the killing of anyone, regardless of how evil they are. Of course, that doesn't lead me to believe they should be coddled, or not shot in the line of doing criminal work (in the case of lets say an armed robbery).



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

elprincipe on 18 January 2009
Commando said:
OK their are some good points here. My only question with the court cost thing, is hou is the court proceedings more costly in a conviction of Capitol Punishment as opposed to Life imprissionment.

I mean I guess I'm asking how could killing someone in the end rather than leaving them in jail somehow make the trials and appeals (that have already happened) cost more.

Good question.  The main point to consider is that the appeals process for death penalty cases is much more exhaustive than for other cases.  Higher courts are more likely to take an appeal for a death penalty case, since we are after all discussing a human being's very life and not simply his imprisonment.  I'm not certain as to the guidelines, but I do know it's much more likely that a death penalty case appeal will be heard by a higher court than an appeal of a conviction of burglary, for example.

So basically the more appeals are heard, the more court costs there are.  Courts are expensive, with judges and prosecutors and public defenders for the accused all getting paid.  These cases are argued quite thoroughly since a life is at stake.  In the end, all these costs end up being more than it would have been to just keep the person in prison for the rest of his life.

But in any case, basing your opinion here on the actual cost is not really reasonable, unless you feel that a human life can have a cost associated with it.  To be frank, even if it cost more to imprison someone for life than to put them to death I'd still be against it, because my position is determined by the morality of the issue and not by monetary concerns.  I'm sure people who are for the death penalty feel the same way (but have come to the opposite conclusion, obviously).  I doubt anyone here would seriously argue that someone should be put to death because it's "too expensive" to let them live...right?

 



In Memoriam RVW Jr.

SSBB Friend Code = 5455-9050-8670 (PM me if you add so I can add you!) 

Tetris Party Friend Code = 116129046416 (ditto)