PDA

View Full Version : Who says we don't need the death penalty?



DennisR1977
09-12-2012, 02:57 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2012/09/12/armin-wand-fire-kill-family_n_1876882.html

This was in the local paper today, I threw up in my mouth when I read this.

animalfan
09-01-2013, 08:44 AM
That's sick. Tried to put his 2 year old back in the fire?

leafs43
09-01-2013, 08:48 AM
Lesbiahonest.....


Aside from the kid, every married man has contemplated killing his wife and starting over.

DocHol1day
09-01-2013, 09:15 AM
so you think we should spend more money just to make you feel good?

_AdaM_
09-01-2013, 09:47 AM
so you think we should spend more money just to make you feel good?

I'm sure if capital punishment was restored, mass companies would mass produce cheap execution drugs to secure some of dat der state money.

Also, a single bullet would do the trick or a cheap rope imported from the far east.

Ask the Saudis, they have their head screwed on right when it comes to capital punishment.

flairon
09-01-2013, 09:51 AM
so you think we should spend more money just to make you feel good?

I'll donate my rifle and ammo. Way cheaper than housing for life or needle.

animalfan
09-01-2013, 09:55 AM
Lesbiahonest.....


Aside from the kid, every married man has contemplated killing his wife and starting over.

Uh, not this guy.


I'm sure if capital punishment was restored, mass companies would mass produce cheap execution drugs to secure some of dat der state money.

Also, a single bullet would do the trick or a cheap rope imported from the far east.

Ask the Saudis, they have their head screwed on right when it comes to capital punishment.

Why get expensive drugs? "Cruel and unusual punishment" shouldn't be an issue either, guys like these weren't concerned with killing humanely. I agree that a firing squad or hanging would be the way to go. No need for lifetime sentences, parole, etc. Just execute and move on.

DocHol1day
09-01-2013, 11:04 AM
I'm sure if capital punishment was restored, mass companies would mass produce cheap execution drugs to secure some of dat der state money.

Also, a single bullet would do the trick or a cheap rope imported from the far east.

Ask the Saudis, they have their head screwed on right when it comes to capital punishment.

you guys both know that the reason capital punishment is more expensive isnt because of the actual act of execution. its because of the length and expense of the appeals process.

so i suppose you are advocating for shortening the appeals process?

fine, but more innocent people will be executed as a result. are you ok with that just so you can kill someone who you feel deserves it rather than lock them away? i'm certainly not, but then again some people dont mind having the blood of innocents on their hands.


I'll donate my rifle and ammo. Way cheaper than housing for life or needle.

Phil9
09-01-2013, 12:12 PM
A lifetime in prison will always be a far more horrible punishment than a swift death via lethal injection.

flairon
09-01-2013, 12:16 PM
you guys both know that the reason capital punishment is more expensive isnt because of the actual act of execution. its because of the length and expense of the appeals process.

so i suppose you are advocating for shortening the appeals process?

fine, but more innocent people will be executed as a result. are you ok with that just so you can kill someone who you feel deserves it rather than lock them away? i'm certainly not, but then again some people dont mind having the blood of innocents on their hands.

Yes, the appeals process should be shortened.

In todays day and age of video, audio, digital footprints, cross connected databases and dna evidence, it's a pretty safe bet that if you're looking at a capital punishment after a trial, its plainly because you are guilty.
1 appeal
2 years max.

after that...seeya.

People can't really say capital punishment execution is more expensive than life sentence. It depends on the age. If that person is mid 20's, mid 30's and gets a life sentence, there s the possibility of another 30 years on the taxpayer tab and as they get older the more expensive they will be. So there's no way to really throw a blanket statement of execution costs more than housing.

And again....i'll donate my rifle and bullets. That should cut down on the execution costs substantially. Problem solved.

liebkuchen
09-01-2013, 12:56 PM
Ethically, I go straight for no death penalty. However, I'm British so I haven't been brought up with the concept as an actual reality in my home country.
Personally, of course there are cases where I wouldn't shed a tear. Didn't read the above article but the recent rape/murder cases in India spring to mind.

However, the risk of miscarriage is scary. And it tends to affect the poorest who have the least access to decent legal defence. And if you're not white in the US, you're more likely to be given a death penalty for the same offence as a white person. That isn't justice, its not even revenge.

The best summary of the anti- argument is by Ian Hislop (British journalist) on Have I Got News for You which is a sartirical news quiz in the UK - his argument is serious enough - search on youtube for 'Ian Hislop Capital Punishment'. IMHO.

Dragger
09-01-2013, 01:29 PM
The only people that think it costs twice as much for the death penalty vs a life sentence are anti-death penalty theists. It's simply not true.

Inmates with life sentences are allowed to have appeals also. Add in the fact that it costs around $36,000 a year to take care of and protect a single max security inmate, and there ya go.

$36,000 a year for 60 years is approximately $2,160,000, and that's before their appeals...

Fiyero
09-01-2013, 01:44 PM
The only people that think it costs twice as much for the death penalty vs a life sentence are anti-death penalty theists. It's simply not true.

Inmates with life sentences are allowed to have appeals also. Add in the fact that it costs around $36,000 a year to take care of and protect a single max security inmate, and there ya go.

$36,000 a year for 60 years is approximately $2,160,000, and that's before their appeals...Actually, you're wrong. In California, it costs roughly $90,000 per year, per inmate on death row more than it costs for inmates serving life without parole in a maximum security prison. The current prison system in California costs between $130 and 230 million per year. Without the death penalty, it would cost $12 million per year.

Maryland's death penalty is 3 times the cost of life in prison. Kansas is 70% more for death penalty cases than life in prison.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-cost

Dragger
09-01-2013, 01:56 PM
Actually, you're wrong. In California, it costs roughly $90,000 per year, per inmate on death row more than it costs for inmates serving life without parole in a maximum security prison. The current prison system in California costs between $130 and 230 million per year. Without the death penalty, it would cost $12 million per year.

Maryland's death penalty is 3 times the cost of life in prison. Kansas is 70% more for death penalty cases than life in prison.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-cost

According to an anti-death penalty source that only looked at 4 out of 50 states.

Then you factor in the fact that the main problem with the death penalty is we give them 30-40 years before the actual execution. Which is a problem that needs to be fixed. The death penalty is supposed to be that, not "the death penalty... after you've lived the rest of your life.

http://www.realcostofprisons.org/papers-mass.html

Death row inmates shouldn't be housed more than a year after they are sentenced. Housing them an additional 30-40 years is a travisty of justice.

Bullroarer
09-01-2013, 02:09 PM
Bringing back the death penalty isn't enough of a deterrent. And what's the point of killing someone swiftly and gently? If revenge is what you want, that'd be a weak way to do it. You would need to legalize torture.

Dragger
09-01-2013, 03:06 PM
Bringing back the death penalty isn't enough of a deterrent. And what's the point of killing someone swiftly and gently? If revenge is what you want, that'd be a weak way to do it. You would need to legalize torture.

The point is to humanely remove a vile worthless individual that is only here to do harm and murder people.

lasher
09-01-2013, 03:14 PM
lol'd at anti-death penalty theist. Dat reddit leaking again.

ElderJefferson
09-01-2013, 03:32 PM
Aside from the kid, every married man has contemplated killing his wife and starting over.

So, is it anger issues you're dealing with, or did you marry the wrong woman?

dweeegs
09-01-2013, 03:34 PM
Gov. Martin O'Malley signed a bill repealing the death penalty in MD, goes into effect in October

Dragger
09-01-2013, 03:37 PM
lol'd at anti-death penalty theist. Dat reddit leaking again.

A huge majority of anti-death penalty are theists, for religious reasons. They just try to twist the economic reasons to add to it. It's a joke.

lasher
09-01-2013, 03:38 PM
A huge majority of anti-death penalty are theists, for religious reasons. They just try to twist the economic reasons to add to it. It's a joke.

well I'm now convinced that a huge majority of anti-death penalty people are theists. For religious reasons.

It definitely can't be more naunced than that of course. Definitely not reasons like ...


- Race plays a role in determining who lives and who dies.
- Incompetent justice system.
- Innocent people have been convicted and executed.
- The richer you are the better your defense will be.

Dragger
09-01-2013, 04:09 PM
well I'm now convinced that a huge majority of anti-death penalty people are theists. For religious reasons.

It definitely can't be more naunced than that of course. Definitely not reasons like ...


- Race plays a role in determining who lives and who dies.
- Incompetent justice system.
- Innocent people have been convicted and executed.
- The richer you are the better your defense will be.

LOL, meanwhile a majority of anti-death penalty are theists for religious reasons that skew economic numbers.

Bullroarer
09-01-2013, 04:11 PM
The point is to humanely remove a vile worthless individual that is only here to do harm and murder people.

Locking them up for life already does that. Twenty three hours a day in a 9x9 for the rest of your life is a far nastier way to go than lethal injection.

ODBM
09-01-2013, 04:34 PM
I'm not a theist and I'm also against the death penalty. Just ship those phaggots off to an island and let them run their own private society of people who think it's socially acceptable to rape and kill.

inb4 Australia

(much smaller island)

Also, men and women on separate islands. We can't have them propagating all over the place.

lasher
09-01-2013, 04:50 PM
LOL, meanwhile a majority of anti-death penalty are theists for religious reasons that skew economic numbers.

totally convincing bro. You should write a paper on it.

firstandgoal
09-01-2013, 05:14 PM
so you think we should spend more money just to make you feel good?

Why does it cost so much money?

flairon
09-01-2013, 06:46 PM
I would say that a tradeoff would be that if there is no death penalty, that we should go back to chain gangs. I have yet to see any state in this country that doesnt need grunt labor for something.

Dragger
09-01-2013, 07:08 PM
I would say that a tradeoff would be that if there is no death penalty, that we should go back to chain gangs. I have yet to see any state in this country that doesnt need grunt labor for something.

We already have work camps and work release centers for inmates to work and earn their sentences down quicker.

flairon
09-01-2013, 07:29 PM
We already have work camps and work release centers for inmates to work and earn their sentences down quicker.

Not work release...chain gangs. All the work release programs I've seen, they are working at their regular job, and just more or less sleeping at jail. I'm saying put them to work for the taxpayer to offset their costs. Larger places, if they have it available, should grow their own foods as well with prison labor.

Dragger
09-01-2013, 07:36 PM
Not work release...chain gangs. All the work release programs I've seen, they are working at their regular job, and just more or less sleeping at jail. I'm saying put them to work for the taxpayer to offset their costs. Larger places, if they have it available, should grow their own foods as well with prison labor.

Ah, good idea.

But inmate friendly politicians wouldn't allow it. Give up too many votes.

Jasonw1178
09-01-2013, 08:00 PM
They should executed by being locked in a burning building, then when it gets real hot and they start burning and choking on the smoke, we let them out, just to throw them back in. Put the whole thing on pay-per-view to recoup any costs.

pullupsbrah
09-01-2013, 08:03 PM
I prefer impaling them upside down through the mouth and out the ass. Leave the corpse where they committed the crime for all to see.

Or solitary confinement for the remainder the of their lives. They get three meals a day but that's it, no recreation, no reading material, nothing. Just the piece of **** and his cell. This can wreck a person psychologically and the reason why the Geneva Convention ruled it as torture.

But my ideas are probably too extreme for most people.