|
The death penalty (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| i think ppl that resort to economics to justify their position on capital punishment have got their priorities a lil messed up. |
|
|
| NebulousQ |
I dont have enough knowledge and life experience yet to take a stand on this position.
However if somehow I ever found myself facing life in prison without the possibility of parole or the death sentence; I would greatly prefer to be executed. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| As I've said earlier in a similar debate, I think forced labor is a way to go. That way they don't cost the state any money and are doing something useful, while at the same time suffering the torment of slavery. |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
Lol. Well I certainly don't have any specific figures or studies to back me up, but just think about the cost of food, medicine, etc. for a 30 year old in prison. It just seems like good ole' common sense.
Let's just assume a cheap $3 per meal, 3 times per day...(I'll assume the guy lives to be 75, so 45 years of prison)...3 meals per day = 21 meals per week, or just figure about 1100 meals per year at a cost of $3 per meal = about $3300 per year on food alone. multiply that by 45 years and you've got close to $150K in food costs alone. Let alone costs to operate and maintain the prison, healthcare costs, the cost of the property the prison is on, etc. I have no idea what the total is, but 1 bullet at WalMart probably costs about $0.50. One crank of the handle for the electric chair probably uses $50 worth of power at best (again, guessing, but based on my electric bills, I'm sure it's a reasonable assumption). One needle full of potassium chloride is probably less than $50 too. Point is, you can try to throw in all sorts of intangible costs to justify not taking a life away, but if you just think about the math, I don't understand how it could possibly be cheaper to pay for a person that is alive for years vs. a person who no longer exists. Think about it. IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. Alive or dead, the court costs apply in both cases so it's a moot point. If you're sustaining someone's life, it costs money. If you don't have to pay to sustain a life that no longer exists, it doesn't cost money. There's your answer. No need for politics. Just use your noggin. |
Unfortunately common sense doesn't quite apply to this scenario because I don't think many understand the processes and costs of what it takes to execute someone. Appeals processes take decades which don't even begin to confront the court costs despite the extra 20-30 years in a life sentence. Quite a number of states have done analyses of the costs of capital punishment and they have all been fairly consistent with their conclusions (these exclude studies done by the media which have been fairly consistent).
http://6news.ljworld.com/section/de...ty/story/119087
http://www.comptroller.state.tn.us/...eathpenalty.pdf
http://www-pps.aas.duke.edu/people/.../cook/comnc.pdf |
|
|
| Arbiter |
Court costs are a red herring if we're discussing the cost of the death penalty in theory as opposed to the cost of imprisonment in theory. The death penalty may be more expensive in practice as it is currently practiced (in the U.S. anyway), but that has little or nothing to do with the death penalty itself, but rather the cumbersome appeals process we happen to presently associate with it.
If cost was our primary concern, the death penalty (or forced labor) would be the best option - with no appeals process whatsoever. That's not very relevant, however, since only a fool would argue that our justice system is accurate enough to justify making cost our primary concern. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
As I've said earlier in a similar debate, I think forced labor is a way to go. That way they don't cost the state any money and are doing something useful, while at the same time suffering the torment of slavery. |
sounds more cruel than death. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yoepus
sounds more cruel than death. |
Well, that really depends on the practical part of the enforcement. Whether prisoners will be given good food and not much work or bad food and lots of work. But ultimately, the advantage such a proposal has over the death sentence is that if a person is later found innocent, a sentence can be revoked and a person can take a lot of money from the state for the inconvenience. |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yoepus
sounds more cruel than death. |
Sounds better than death to me actually... Besides, it would work as a deterrent, it would benefit society in an economical way, and it would learn (perhaps) prisoners that they have to work to get something done... etc
Sounds pretty good to me... |
|
|
| NeoPhono |
| Genital electrocution is where it's at. |
|
|
| Goashem |
| if a prisoner wants to die and is on death row would you guys execute him ? (as in youd be the one giving the lethal injection)? |
|
|
| Psy-T |
| quote: | Originally posted by Goashem
if a prisoner wants to die and is on death row would you guys execute him ? (as in youd be the one giving the lethal injection)? |
i'd have no moral problem with it. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by Goashem
if a prisoner wants to die and is on death row would you guys execute him ? (as in youd be the one giving the lethal injection)? |
do I get paid or does this just fall under "civic duties" ? |
|
|
|
|
