The Death Penalty

@Bobby: I don't take it as flame-bait, you're welcome to your opinion. When viewed like that, yes it is. But what I meant was, I believe there's a better use of government funds than keeping a murderer alive...say, feeding some poor people who haven't committed a crime.

There's a limited amount of money to go around, and since sacrifices have to be made somewhere, I consider that a worthy one. Apologies if that makes me a cold-hearted bastard.

edited 26th Feb '11 3:23:34 PM by drunkscriblerian

If I were to write some of the strange things that come under my eyes they would not be believed. ~Cora M. Strayer~

And the other side finds the idea that we're sheltering, feeding, and providing medicare to a criminal who did something worthy of life in prison to be even worse.

Who do you think are providing the money to pamper these criminals?(pamper...by the standards of how they SHOULD be treated, that is, prison life isn't the good life, but it's still way too luxurious for a prison)

Does money grow from a tree?

And I don't want to make this too off-topic. But I'm assuming you're in the US. Isn't it a tad hypocritical to say that it's sickening to execute a criminal, yet at the same time spending who knows how much money invading a third world country?

edited 26th Feb '11 3:27:42 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

Bobby G is in the UK.

My name is Addy. Please call me that instead of my username.

okay...so it's not as hypocritical...the UK isn't involved with the war in a third world country is it?

edited 26th Feb '11 3:27:09 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

@Signed: I agree with you, but let's try not to get too emotional here.

Yes, Bobby's in the UK. But I'm going to make a leap here and postulate that he doesn't agree with America's aggressive militarism around the globe either. Neither do I; I consider it a gratuitous waste of funds and blood.

Back on topic.

So, I guess the debate boils down to whose life is more valuable, since there obviously (if the current economic status of America is any indicator) isn't enough to do everything we'd like to.

If I were to write some of the strange things that come under my eyes they would not be believed. ~Cora M. Strayer~

That strikes me as loaded. No one is going to claim a criminal's life is more valuable than a non-criminal's, after all.

My name is Addy. Please call me that instead of my username.

This question is easy...the ones who didn't commit a crime, and among those who did commit crimes, the ones who committed the less severe crimes.

Of course, theres the issue of how much less severe is rape compared to murder...and all other factors, like multiple murders, torture then murder, etc...

edited 26th Feb '11 3:31:51 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

CDA: It may sound loaded, but its the decision we have to make. There isn't enough money in the budget for everything america needs and wants, so we have to make choices. One of those is what we do with our criminals. An oversimplification, perhaps.

Again, I think the main problem isn't the death penalty; at the risk of yet another derail, I'd say the problem is over-incarceration and a Byzantine legal system. If we fix those problems, a lot of others (such as prison overcrowding, the source of most of the misery inside) would disappear.

But speaking of the death penalty...do I support it? In principle, yes. But the current system is totally broken and needs restructuring.

If I were to write some of the strange things that come under my eyes they would not be believed. ~Cora M. Strayer~

By the way, would it be off-topic to discuss lethal injections vs. less stupid ways to execute a criminal?

Or should I make a new thread? Because this is the part that bugs me the most...and this is the part that makes me not a liberal.

---

^ I agree with the system part...for me, it's make a facility designed for petty crimes, give them like 3 strikes before sending them to the prisons with murderers and other hard criminals. And immediately execute the ones who admit to committing a crime that warrants death penalty.

Or better yet, STOP over-paying those lawyers and other people involved in the legal process. They're already incredibly wealthy.

edited 26th Feb '11 3:36:17 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

Something is certainly wrong with the appeals process for it to take 20 years. Whether or not that ends in death, that's a punishment, and if the person is eventually acquitted then it's a Hell of an ordeal.

My name is Addy. Please call me that instead of my username.

@Signed: how we do it is part of the process, I doubt that'd be off-topic.

And I agree that lethal injection is just about the most complicated way to kill someone...with the gas chamber and the electric chair being close seconds.

What's wrong with a bullet to the head?

@CDA: In my wall of text earlier, I agreed with you. Forcing them to wait twenty years or more for a decision is not fair to them, the victims or the taxpayers who have to pay for it.

If I were to write some of the strange things that come under my eyes they would not be believed. ~Cora M. Strayer~

Put like that, I do see your argument, and I don't think it makes you a cold hearted bastard in the slightest.

I guess I hold the rather unpopular view that nobody has any intrinsic right to dictate whose life is more valuable than whose, and that killing a murderer is no better than killing a non-murderer. I realise this is probably a minority opinion.

edited 26th Feb '11 3:49:18 PM by BobbyG

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff

If it has to be done, why not hanging? Noose and a drop, as long as it's set up right it's instant and rope and wood cost little. Certainly not as much as all the expensive chemicals and set up used in the injections.

My name is Addy. Please call me that instead of my username.

"I agree with the system part...for me, it's make a facility designed for petty crimes, give them like 3 strikes before sending them to the prisons with murderers and other hard criminals. And immediately execute the ones who admit to committing a crime that warrants death penalty."

Umm... OK, first impressions aren't everything. That could be a good idea. I mean, just because it sounds like some kind brutal police state... Heck, maybe police states are actually good. Seriously, what??

"Had Mother Nature been a real parent, she would have been in jail for child abuse and murder." -Nick Bostrom

@Bobby: Much as I'd like to agree with you (and I sort of do, in principle), the sad fact is that someone has to. What do you call a system of law, if not one group of people deciding the fate of another? Within the confines of a code, yes...but someone has to sit in judgment and swing the gavel.

In the end, all systems of justice come down to people; one group decides the fate of another. Without this, society cannot function.

It is a shame that it exists, but I invite you to consider that the alternative is anarchy.

No, no one has the intrinsic "right", but someone still has to do it.

If I were to write some of the strange things that come under my eyes they would not be believed. ~Cora M. Strayer~

^^...I did not understand a sentence of what you just said...paraphrase or something please?

The problem with that is it might be painful, hence too "inhumane" for the liberals.

A much better method would be a HEAVY guillotine to the neck. Make sure it drops really fast and hard. Not sure if the head will feel anything, but it's quick, that's for sure. And most won't feel the blade cutting them.

---

Dismemberment is a Truth in Television version of Major Injury Under Reaction. Why do you think shark bites that sever limbs are painless?

Hence why I advocate guillotine or somethig along that line. As long as it's fast and hard, the criminal should feel anything, so the liberals can stop whining about it being inhumane.

edited 26th Feb '11 3:54:59 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

Well, Drunk, I see a distinction between acting to save a life and acting to end one that isn't posing a threat to any other life. Saving lives is great in my book.

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff

@Bobby: saving lives is all well and good. However, when the alternative is life inside a concrete box?

Correct me if I'm wrong but in the UK a "life sentence" is actually for life (in place of how it is in America, where it's something like 40 years). As in, you get a life sentence the only way you leave is in a box.

How is this better than execution?

Besides...from someone who has actually been to prison, I heard that the number one thing the new guys are told is "stay away from lifers". Why? because they know two things:

• There's nothing worse the system can do to them.
• They're not getting out.

So those are guys who are most often guilty of shanking/raping other prisoners; they have no reason to fear consequences.

If I were to write some of the strange things that come under my eyes they would not be believed. ~Cora M. Strayer~

I was thinking that on an emotional level it sounds like a horrible idea. But I realize that's not a valid reason to reject it. Conceivably it could be good idea. But on the other hand, I don't really feel I should take it seriously... Hence the sarcasm.

edited 26th Feb '11 4:03:55 PM by LoveHappiness

"Had Mother Nature been a real parent, she would have been in jail for child abuse and murder." -Nick Bostrom

But how is separating prisoners from petty to serious so police-state like? How is giving them strikes until they have a certain amount so bad?

If they constantly re-offend, shouldn't it be obvious that light prisons are not doing their jobs properly and only going to waste money in the long run?

---

That said, I also advocate harsher charges for people who re-offend, and people whose job is to protect citizens breaking the law.

edited 26th Feb '11 4:05:27 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

A life sentence is potentially for life here, but in practice it's not always. It's sort of up to the judge.

I agree that life imprisonment is hardly ideal, but I see it as necessary quarantine, rather than punishment.

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff

But heres the thing, no matter how expensive it is to sentence a criminal to death, do you honestly think it costs less to sentence them for life? Paying for their shelter, heating, medicare, and food for the rest of their life?

And if it still costs more to sentence them to death in the long run, oh god our world is messed up.

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

"In some jurisdictions, those who are convicted of a misdemeanor are known as misdemeanants (as contrasted with those convicted of a felony who are known as felons). Depending on the jurisdiction, examples of misdemeanors may include: petty theft, prostitution, public intoxication, simple assault, disorderly conduct, trespass, vandalism, drug possession, reckless driving, and other similar crimes."

These do not seem serious enough to warrant that. 3 strikes? Come on, that's unnecessarily brutal. And that seems likely to be counterproductive.

edited 26th Feb '11 4:11:15 PM by LoveHappiness

"Had Mother Nature been a real parent, she would have been in jail for child abuse and murder." -Nick Bostrom

^^ That is completely irrelevant to my argument, although, yes, at present in the USA, it's cheaper to simply imprison somebody than execute them.

edited 26th Feb '11 4:12:01 PM by BobbyG

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff

@Bobby: How bout the bit where I asserted that "lifers" are one of the biggest sources of prison violence, according to someone who's actually been there?

If you don't want to take my word for it, I'll try and dig up statistics...but say for a moment its true. That affect your position any?

If I were to write some of the strange things that come under my eyes they would not be believed. ~Cora M. Strayer~