Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#1
No I'm not advocating that the death penalty should be re-introduced in order to reduce the prison population but those that want to see its return may wish to reconsider in light of Americas experiences with it.
California where the death penalty was re-introduced in 1978 has managed to spend $4 billion taxpayer dollars on capital punishment since then.
A study estimates that the 13 executions California has carried out in the past three decades have cost an average of $308 million each in legal fees and death row security costs which is approx 20 times more than a life-without-parole case.
It really beggars belief and disspells those that think the death penalty is a cost effective solution to prison overcrowding and a deterrant.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#2
No but justice is served.
Besides the US system needs reform with its seemingly endless appeals procedures. Justice should be swift after a fair trial and appeal and an independent evaluation of the evidence to ensure it was valid and substantial enough to eliminate doubt.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#3
"You are wrong to kill so we will kill you because we are right."
Judicial killing is still killing and is never 'justice', just a revenge instinct. It could never be swift as there has to be appeal and question procedures as any mistake shows up all the other executions as what they are, legal murders.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#4
No Chris - there is no comparison. There is a massive difference between the two.
#5
Please specify.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#6
Bern - since when did a murderer give their victim a fair trial, a right of appeal in an open process and ensure they were guilty of a major crime before murdering them. Most people who are murdered are not guilty of any crime and are are quite innocent.
The death penalty should be available and used only for the very worse crimes and when there is not doubt at all of guilt. The death penalty should not apply to all and it was overused in the past. But it should be available.
People like West and Hindley do not deserve to live for their crimes.
#7
Emotionally I am with you - people who harm and kill people, especially children, are those I could probably see off myself with little trouble. But the reasons for a structured legal system include the drive to protect our humanity and protect individuals from their own impulses, as well as to set boundaries for behaviours. If the death penalty was a deterrent, and therefore a protection for the rest of us, there would not be as much violent crime in those places where it is still in use - and the stats show us that in fact the reverse is true. The only purpose it could serve is financial - we could save the funding of a prison place. But Mareks information indicates that even this is not the case So it boils down to a simple need for blood. This is not sufficient justification for state sanctioned murder, which is what it would be, no question.
There is also no such thing as a totally safe conviction when we are talking about terminating a life.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#8
I have mixed feelings on this one. I do not believe in the death penalty except for those such as the horrific crimes that the two Wests and Peter Sutcliffe committed, where there was absolutely no doubt at all.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#9
i'm afraid im with bern and chris p on this one
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#10
Don't be afraid Keith, when we're right we're right.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#11
I am totally against capital punishment but even the keenest pro hang 'em and flog 'em advocate would find it difficult to justify the costs never mind the moral obligations.
Let me pose another scenario and bearing in mind the recent dignitas debate ..What if,after being found guilty,the person opts of his/her own free will to be executed rather than spend a lifetime behind bars? What then?
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#12
Did happen in America. He probably went smugly to the firing squad knowing he had used the system to turn his prosecutors into killers like himself.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#13
CHRIS;
Just pointing out the many times i agree with all manner of differing political view points, as often people claim my views are one sided which is far wide of the point
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
