Death Penalty?

Why is it that people on death row have to wait 10 years to be put to death? Just start doing them one by one, one evry hour could you image how much money that would save the tax payers?

They would not need to be fed, clothed cleaned, babysat for so long. Just get rid of them.

what do you guys think?

it is a good idea, i think it would disturb the public if we just strarted killing people left and right tho.

Uh.. what if it turns out they're innocent?

here's a quote from a speech i wrote for school earlier this year about the death penalty. i got most of the information from www.aclu.org

"A 1982 study showed that were the death penalty to be reintroduced in New York, the cost of the capital trial alone would be more than double the cost of life a life term in prison. Florida, with one of the nation's most crowded death rows, has estimated that the true cost of each execution is approximately 3.2 million dollars, which is around six times the cost of an average life sentence."

I agree with you Wind about the death penalty. I think that a person who is found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt should be executed within 24 hours. Firebird has a point about the cost of an execution but if they went back to public hangings or just shot the person in the head or even better let the person, or family of victum decide how that person should be executed. If a person is found guilty of rape or murder then that victums family or the victum itself should have say in how that perpatrator should be executed.

A lot of people say that I am sedistic and twisted but I do not think that my hard earned money should be paying for some poor sap that can not get his head out of his butt to live. I have an ex-brother-in-law whom has spent more time in the prison system then out and every time that he has been paroled or released he does something to get put back in so he does not have to worry about paying taxes, buy food or clothing and the state can pay for his kids.

I think it should be done by a firing squad. Have 20 shooters there all un-identified, randomly pick a bullet out of a jar, 19 will be fake and one will be real.

Bang, no ones knows if they did it but would be gratified to rid the earth of someone who deserves it.

By the way it shouldnt be done the next day, they should have exactly one week to make peace with (try anyways) their life. However they should not be allowed to talk to anyone of the victims family. They should not be allowed gratification of their crime.

There should be a minimum amount of days that a jury should be allowed to review all of the evidence/testimonies whatever, like a week, to go over and over and over to be 100% sure that they believe that that person is the culprit. If they decide that they are, no arguing after the fact, that's it, bye bye.

I think that when one persons denies another person their rights, then once convicted of this, they should be stripped of their rights of citizenship and should not be protected by the same laws that they themselves broke. Having served in the military, I could never understand how someone who serves in the military has fewer rights then those who serve prison sentences. I can understand the discipline thing, but shouldn't the same apply to those in prison? You know, the discipline thing. Because prisoners have the right to sue whenever they feel their rights are being disregarded, judgements become so extremely lengthy and expensive, soon justice will become unaffordable, this has become ridiculous. Here in Oklahoma, trying to convict the two most responsible for the bombing, killing hundreds of innocent people, it about bankrupted us. Victims become further victimized and who refunds them for their pain and suffering?

It may be true that we must be careful not to wrongly convict the innocent and need to have precautions in place, but when protecting the innocent prevents us from doing justice, then we have crossed the line and need to turn back.

What people are proposing will make wrongful executions even more likely to happen.
Life imprisonment and slave labour is the way to go. That way, if (as will inevitably will happen), a person is wrongly convicted, there is at least the possibility of liberation and reperations.

what's the point of the death penalty? it is not a punishment, because the purpose of a punishment is to make it so that the person will learn from their mistakes and correct themselves. and as far as deterrents to crime, according to statistics at aclu.org, there is absolutely no correlation to the amount of people executed per year(it's gone from like 2 to 50 since 1970 i think) and the national capital crime rate, which has had no significant increases or decreases. basically, the only thing that i can see the death penalty as doing is giving pleasure to emotion-clouded victims who want to see the perpetrator suffer to satiate their own twisted sadistic impulses, brought on by what the person did. anyone is capable of murder, depending on the circumstance, and i hold to this. i see no purpose to capital punishment--it costs more, too, as i've said before. what needs to be done is to focus on the source of the crimes, and not the crimes themselves. this is no easy task, but it beats looking the other way and increasing death sentences like there's no tomorrow, which accomplishes nothing. lets think with our heads and not with our glands.

[the cost of the capital trial alone would be more than double the cost of life a life term in prison. ]

What the study left out was the added costs of appeals. I support the ACLU, but they kind of squewed the facts there.

I agree there are monsters in this world who do not deserve the air they breathe. If there is no doubt as to his or her guilt, then forget the appeals, get it on with the the execution.

However, because of the chance of convicting the wrong person, if there is an ounce of doubt as to their guilt, then life in prison with the appeals process should be in effect. But this should work for both the state and the convict. This gives the convict time to prove his innocence. If the state can remove all doubts, then install the death penalty.

As far as rehabilitation, sorry once they cross the line thats it. Insane or not, they should be snuffed. But lets make certain that the person we execute is really the guilty one.

well, i just went by the aclu statistics and so if they're incorrect, damn.
still, when we execute someone we're basically just playing onto this need that the people have of seeing something done about the crime, so that the innocent can have the last move. but in reality, it's just adding another death. nothing is done about the crime, the crime has already been committed, so what good is it to kill them? now we just have two deaths, and nothing has been solved. really, i can't understand this at all. i really would like to see more time spent going into crime prevention rather than punishment, although i'm not going to pretend that i know all what can be done to this means--although i know that preventing murders is a hell of a lot more challenging than strapping a guy to a chair and pulling a lever. i'm still going by the aclu statistics here, but there really doesn't appear to be any correlation between capital punishment rates and capital crime rates in the u.s. if this is true, than we need to look for a better deterrent to murders--for example, why does the united states have the highest murder rate of any inustrialized society and also the highest capital punishment rate? maybe other things need to be looked at. if canada can keep a relatively low murder rate without capital punishment in effect, than there's no reason that every other country shouldn't be able to.
i'm not against punishment--i'm just against murder, by the state or by anyone else.

[nothing is done about the crime,]

To prevent the crime from happening in the first place involves a major change in our society. We first must guarantee that everyone has a job. We must assure that mental facilities are open to everyone of every economic level. Legalize drugs and prostitution. Require parenting classes and licenses. You get the idea.

After covering all of those bases, you'll still have someone commiting murder. The question remains, how do we punish the wrong doer? I say death by any means. It may not be the Christian way, but I'm not so there.

lol, i've said about everything i have to argue, so i'll just leave you to consider that canada and most(all?) of europe has abolished the death penalty, and as i've said before, has a substantially lower crime rate than the united states. i don't know why. i'm just pointing out the facts. if crime can be lowered without having to kill anyone, i'm all for that. death sucks. even if the person dying is a remorseless mass murderer. everyone has the ability to change and to do good with their lives. we should, as civilized human beings and not barbarians, allow everyone the opportunity to change.

quote:

---

everyone has the ability to change and to do good with their lives

---

Not every one has the want to do so. Alot have the want to do the exact opposite.

Alright, how about we abolish the death penalty. But we set up special prisons for murderers and maybe any other vicious crime. And in these prisons, instead of it being like a resort, you make it more into a hell. You make the prisoners work for their own food. They don't get priviliages. They shouldn't get the rights that other criminals like a theif get. And you send them there.

I am not saying this place should have cruel and unusual torture, but it shouldn't better then what some innocent people have at home.

But at anytime the prisoner can except help, in which he is taken to a phsycologist, where after a month or so, he can then leave the "dungeon" and be sent to another prison bent on rehiblitation, but only if 4 out of 5 expert phsycologist say he can change or he has the wants to change.

This is just a rough idea and has some holes, but it does address most bases. There is no death penalty. Yet, the prisoner isn't costing us much. The prisoner isn't given more rights then he should have, yet they aren't really forced into the harshness. And it also isn't just a hotel for them.