• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Capital Punishment Justified?

Should Capital Punishment be supported?

  • It should be supported in both principle and practice.

    Votes: 31 45.6%

  • Yes in principle, but not in practice due to the ambiguity of social bias.

    Votes: 11 16.2%

  • It should be opposed both in principle and practice.

    Votes: 26 38.2%
  • Total voters
    68
Shewter said:
I see how this could be true. But like I said I have not seen a "single death" example. The only thing I've seen are generalizations and speculations.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by "single death"? A comparison of some sort?
 
Tucker Case said:
What do you mean by "single death"? A comparison of some sort?
Click to expand...

Yesm. How much it would cost when all is said and done with from one "average" death penalty sentancing and procedure, as opposed to the cost of a life sentancing and term of a similar aged person.
 
Shewter said:
Yesm. How much it would cost when all is said and done with from one "average" death penalty sentancing and procedure, as opposed to the cost of a life sentancing and term of a similar aged person.
Click to expand...

I've seen those before and they tend to be in favor of life sentencing from what I;ve seen for the reasons I've given, but those were physical articles from years ago. things may have changed since then. I don;t have nay online sources for it since it isn't really a huge concern of mine.

I'm OK with the individual states having the choice. I would just hope that my state becomes a no Death Penalty state. It's halfway there right now.
 
jamesrage said:
In some cases the death penalty serves as a deterrent.
Click to expand...

Not according to the Supreme Court in their rulings in Furman Vs Georgia and Gregg Vs Georgia.

Most of the anti-death penalty nuts seem to show as much compassion for the victims and their loved ones as the scum on death row.
Click to expand...

And most pro-death penalty nuts seem not to give a crap about the innocents killed under the penalty. Nor the obscene cost.
 
Tucker Case said:
: Geez! I wasn't aware I had these beliefs. Can you teach me more about what I advocate?
Click to expand...


When you advocate a life sentence you are advocating that the victims loved ones and every law abiding citizen support these scum for the rest of their lives.That is the result of life in prison, you,me and everyone else paying for the room and baord, security,medical care and anything else these inmates get.
 
DeeJayH said:
some people do debate it, but there are many articles, including some in this very thread that show it is cheaper to give someone a life sentence than to give them the death penalty and all the appeals and expenses that come with it
Click to expand...

Then we need to find a way to make it cheaper to execute someone on death row. I suggest that the stronger the evidence used to convict someone the less appeals they get and getting rid of any insanity nonsense(since it is irrelevent to the fact the individual committed the crime). While these scum on are death feed them bologna sandwiches or just feed them vitamin enriched bread,if they want to commit suicide in their cell let them, do not spend any money on medical care for them, do not let them have access to libraries or any of the that other stuff.
 
jamesrage said:
Then we need to find a way to make it cheaper to execute someone on death row.
Click to expand...

That is inherently the problem. The primary added costs of a capital punishment case verse a life in prison is proving without a doubt that they did it. That requires extra effort, extra evidence and far more work then in a life in prison. That all adds up to much higher costs. The costs to house aren't significently different then life in prison. But the alternative would be to reduce the necessary evidence but that will inevitably lead to even more innocents being executed. That's not acceptable.

Costs of the Death Penalty | Death Penalty Information Center
 
obvious Child said:
That is inherently the problem. The primary added costs of a capital punishment case verse a life in prison is proving without a doubt that they did it. That requires extra effort, extra evidence and far more work then in a life in prison. That all adds up to much higher costs. The costs to house aren't significently different then life in prison. But the alternative would be to reduce the necessary evidence but that will inevitably lead to even more innocents being executed. That's not acceptable.

Costs of the Death Penalty | Death Penalty Information Center
Click to expand...

I honestly don't understand why anyone would think that life in prison is "BETTER" than the death penalty.

I wonder how many people that preach about the death penalty being inhumane etc would commit suicide if they were institutionalized.


Either way, I think it's silly that they need that much "more" to put someone out rather than imprison them for life. Either way, the person is effed.
 
THis is really shaping up to be an argumentative thread, but I think there's abit of a skew towards support for it and less people that oppose it. I will write a comprehensive reply to that post addressing my two points later, once I'm back home.

On the issue of costs, the people arguing that life imprisonment is less expensive tend to ignore the propensity of court appeals and procedures that come along with the death penalty, that all in all add up to an avergae surpassing the average cost of life imprisonment.

Why the squabble about the emotion involved and the extent to which the death penalty is humane? Its quite obvious, attempts for the method of execution to be made humane is evident over the years, from the French gullotine of the 18th century to the replacement of drawing and quatering with hanging in 19th century Britain, from the use of the electric chair to the eventual use of lethal injection today. If humane treatment of criminals is what is intended, why even take away their right to life? Why not employ life imprisonment, a process that achieves the same goals?

I'm incredibly sleepy as I write this, I just woke up, so please pardon any apparent lack of logic.

-Alex
 
Shewter said:
I honestly don't understand why anyone would think that life in prison is "BETTER" than the death penalty.
Click to expand...

In some ways it's not. But death row has a way of making people work on getting you released. Life in prison, not so much.

Either way, the person is effed.
Click to expand...

Be that as it may, my mine issue is the cost as well as innocent people being executed.
 
Shewter said:
Dunno about you, but I would rather be killed quickly than spend the rest of my life in prison.
Click to expand...
Shewter said:
It's not the criminal I am referring to. It is the "innocent" individual wrongly accused and sentenced to life in prison. I am arguing from my opinion as an innocent.
Click to expand...

Excuse me for putting the two together - but as they relate it made sense to reply both in one go.

I'm using the examples of miscarriage of justice which we have seen plenty of in the UK in the last few years.

Birmingham Six - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Birmingham Six - for example, could have been executed for terrorism if we still had Capital Punishment but they now walk free after 20 or so years false imprisonment. They I think are happy there was no Death Penalty.

Plenty other such cases and I'm sure there are in the US too. If I was innocent I would prefer to live and fight to clear my name than die knowing someone else did what I was supposed to have - and I'd rather not have my name, kids or offspring tarnished by false justice either.
 
jamesrage said:
Then we need to find a way to make it cheaper to execute someone on death row. I suggest that the stronger the evidence used to convict someone the less appeals they get and getting rid of any insanity nonsense(since it is irrelevent to the fact the individual committed the crime). While these scum on are death feed them bologna sandwiches or just feed them vitamin enriched bread,if they want to commit suicide in their cell let them, do not spend any money on medical care for them, do not let them have access to libraries or any of the that other stuff.
Click to expand...

We did but it was ruled out as inhumane.

1 bullet, 4 blanks or the execution rig with 3 bullets. Less the $1.00 per execution. Reduce the wait period on death row from 10 years to one week for persons having direct DNA evidence against them.



Costs of the Death Penalty | Death Penalty Information Center
“The additional cost of confining an inmate to death row, as compared to the maximum security prisons where those sentenced to life without possibility of parole ordinarily serve their sentences, is $90,000 per year per inmate. With California’s current death row population of 670, that accounts for $63.3 million annually.”
Click to expand...

Ok so thats only $4k more?
 
Tucker Case said:
IMO, the government should not be killing it's citizens for any reason. The only logical reason for capital punishment is as revenge. The Government is not in the revenge business.
Click to expand...
Thomas Jefferson would disagree with you.
 
cherokee said:
We did but it was ruled out as inhumane.

1 bullet, 4 blanks or the execution rig with 3 bullets. Less the $1.00 per execution.
Click to expand...

Actually execution by firing squad is still legal in Oklahoma and Idaho. Four inmates in Utah could still face firing squads since the their law banning execution by firing squads was not retroactive.
 
obvious Child said:
And most pro-death penalty nuts seem not to give a crap about the innocents killed under the penalty.
Click to expand...

We do not punish criminals based on the few who might actually be innocent. We punish criminals based on the fact that the huge vast majority of them are guilty of the crime they have been convicted of. Besides the anti-death penalty side already stated that it doesn't the government shouldn't be in the business of "revenge", so in that regard if there are actually innocent people who have been executed their deaths do not matter to you either and I am sure the financial cost do not matter to you either.

Nor the obscene cost.
Click to expand...

Then it needs to be made cheaper. Because I sure the drugs,electricity or whatever else is used to execute someone doesn't cost millions of dollars. It is all the bull **** that happens before the execution that cost millions of dollars. I am sure those things can be cut. Because there is no reason why one trial for murder should cost more than the other, there is no reason why someone who was convicted with very strong evidence should have a **** load of appeals, nor is there any reason why one court appointed attorney should cost more than another court attorney for the accused.
 
Last edited:
DeeJayH said:
and yet it is still cheaper than a death sentence
Click to expand...

No, it isn't the death penalty that is expensive, it's all the ridiculous amount of legal wrangling we allow death row inmates to engage in at taxpayer expense. Instead of limiting appeals to claims of factual innocence, we let them appeal on any basis whatsoever in a desperate attempt to stay alive. It extends their lives for decades and they stand a better chance of dying of old age than of actually getting executed.

The actual execution, if it ever comes, is positively cheap in comparison.
 
obvious Child said:
That is inherently the problem. The primary added costs of a capital punishment case verse a life in prison is proving without a doubt that they did it.
Click to expand...

Which was done in the original trial, then it was done again in the mandatory appeal. That's twice. How many times do we have to prove it? How many frivolous appeals do we have to permit before we say enough and execute the criminal? That's where the cost comes in, not the execution itself.
 
jamesrage said:
We do not punish criminals based on the few who might actually be innocent. We punish criminals based on the fact that the huge vast majority of them are guilty of the crime they have been convicted of. Besides the anti-death penalty side already stated that it doesn't the government shouldn't be in the business of "revenge", so in that regard if there are actually innocent people who have been executed their deaths do not matter to you either and I am sure the financial cost do not matter to you either.



Then it needs to be made cheaper. Because I sure the drugs,electricity or whatever else is used to execute someone doesn't cost millions of dollars. It is all the bull **** that happens before the execution that cost millions of dollars. I am sure those things can be cut. Because there is no reason why one trial for murder should cost more than the other, there is no reason why someone who was convicted with very strong evidence should have a **** load of appeals, nor is there any reason why one court appointed attorney should cost more than another court attorney for the accused.
Click to expand...
As we all know, the death penalty was cheaper when hanging and firing squads were allowed, as well as a short appeals process. It was made more expensive by laws developed during the last century.
 
American said:
Thomas Jefferson would disagree with you.
Click to expand...

He would aslo disagree with me about how one would need to be an immoral scumbag piece of **** in order to actually have the gall to own another person, let alone sleep with a person whom they own.
 
I don't view capital punishment as something that we really need to engage in anymore. I think there are times of high stress when it may have to be employed. So I wouldn't say 100% it is never justified. But I think currently where we sit, we no longer need to employ it. I'm not too happy with government taking out its own citizens anyway, and if we can work in a system where we don't resort to that; then I think we should.
 
Cephus said:
Great, you pay for that. You pay for their food and upkeep, the prisons and the guards that have to be built and hired... oh, and have them build them in your back yard so others aren't inconvenienced.
Click to expand...

Let's see... 59 people were executed in 2004. I doubt that many more guards were needed to guard these criminals. But hell, I guess everyone's been grossly inconvenienced by 59 people right?
 
Cephus said:
Which was done in the original trial, then it was done again in the mandatory appeal. That's twice. How many times do we have to prove it? How many frivolous appeals do we have to permit before we say enough and execute the criminal? That's where the cost comes in, not the execution itself.
Click to expand...

By saying this, are you admitting that you're okay with killing the innocent guy that comes along every year or two who didn't commit the crime he's being found guilty of?

If so, that's fine. That blood is on your hands, not mine.
 
jamesrage said:
We do not punish criminals based on the few who might actually be innocent. We punish criminals based on the fact that the huge vast majority of them are guilty of the crime they have been convicted of.
Click to expand...

And yet innocents are still killed. I guess that's alright by you. It's not by me.

Besides the anti-death penalty side already stated that it doesn't the government shouldn't be in the business of "revenge", so in that regard if there are actually innocent people who have been executed their deaths do not matter to you either and I am sure the financial cost do not matter to you either.
Click to expand...

Their lives matter to me.
 
EgoffTib said:
By saying this, are you admitting that you're okay with killing the innocent guy that comes along every year or two who didn't commit the crime he's being found guilty of?

If so, that's fine. That blood is on your hands, not mine.
Click to expand...

I acknowledge that it is possible that someone not guilty of the particular crime may, in extremely rare situations, get wrongly put to death. That's unfortunate, but since we're not perfect, nor will we ever be perfect, it may, indeed happen. All we can do is strive to limit these cases as much as we possibly can. We don't stop putting people in jail because we make mistakes, we shouldn't stop executing people because of the possibility of making mistakes.

And yes, if that puts the blood on my hands, fine. I've got no problem with that.
 
jamesrage said:
We do not punish criminals based on the few who might actually be innocent. We punish criminals based on the fact that the huge vast majority of them are guilty of the crime they have been convicted of.
Click to expand...

Therefore we should take pains to ensure that we are not punishing those who did not commit the crime. The problem is that the costs to do so rise. Hence when the death penalty is so much more expensive then life in prison.

Besides the anti-death penalty side already stated that it doesn't the government shouldn't be in the business of "revenge", so in that regard if there are actually innocent people who have been executed their deaths do not matter to you either and I am sure the financial cost do not matter to you either.
Click to expand...

What the hell? Their deaths don't matter? How can I ignore the financial costs?

You just said state sanctioned murder of innocents is okay. That's evil.

Then it needs to be made cheaper.
Click to expand...

Then you end up killing more innocent people.

I am sure those things can be cut. Because there is no reason why one trial for murder should cost more than the other, there is no reason why someone who was convicted with very strong evidence should have a **** load of appeals, nor is there any reason why one court appointed attorney should cost more than another court attorney for the accused.
Click to expand...

You clearly have no understanding of the cost processes involved in ensuring beyond a shadow of a doubt that person committed that crime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom