The Death Penalty, why should we have to pay for their mistakes for the rest of their measly lives? Besides, they have better things in prison than most hard working members of society do!
execution does cost more overall, and i think it would depend on the crime and whether or not they have admitted being guilty (therefore no chance DNA would later exonerate them), so for most cases i'm gonna go with life in prison. But if the crime warrants it, and they admitted being guilty I'm not opposed to the death penalty.
Because I have no faith in our justice system which has proven itself flawed again and again and again and because we allow people to be convicted and the death penalty imposed based on purely circumstantial evidence, I prefer LWOP.
I have no problem with the death penalty in principle but I do not think our justice system is good enough to allow us to feel comfortable imposing it.
Life in prison -- less costly, flawed justice system and life in prison is no picnic--I've worked in maximum security prisons for 21 years, medium for 6--it's not fun.
LWOP. Visit Amnesty International and take a hard look at exactly which countries impose the death penalty. America is in very poor company on this issue.
Amen, James H. I believe in the death penalty. That's coming from someone who lives in the state that fed Jeffrey Dahmer, John Wayne Gacey, and Ed Gine (not sure if the spellings are right, but you get my point). Why should we have to feed, clothe and house maniacs like these (and I use these words loosely) people. In my opinion, they were found guilty and should have been put to death within weeks after the trials ended.
I've heard that it's less costly to leave them in jail for life. I don't see how that is possible. Probably years and years of appealing it. Maybe they should put a limit on appeals. One appeal and that's it. If they are convicted again in a court of their peers then lights out, and quickly, not allowing them to stay housed for years waiting to be put to death. Prisons would be less crowded, courts would free up because they wouldn't have to hear these cases over and over, and who knows maybe the murder rates would go down if the punishment fit the crime.
And before you ask if I could push the button, administer the lethal injection or flip the switch......You betcha!
My sister-in-law was murdered and I had 2 friends murdered. All were raped and strangled. All different people, all different cities, none of them knew eachother, and all of their killers are now free, let out after serving their sentences. Where's the justice in that?
yes they are Recon but this seems to be the will of the people I have to disqualify myself from capital cases. I just dont see it being applied fairly. And question if it ever can be. We as humans are flawed in judgement and sometimes let emotions get in the way. its like this guy in Florida killed Jessica Lunsford. He buried that 9 yr old alive. My thinking is give him life put him in general population. That is Justice. But State Sanctioned I have problems with.
I am for the death penality. But when a death penality is handed down I think it should be an automatic life with no parole if the death penality is repealed. Look at the Manson family up for parole after being sentenced to death. Charles Manson is a constant threat to the guards, he throws any and all bodily fluids on them and is in general a pain in the ass. Plus Manson has got to live to see his notoriety, his victims did not. In alot of states, life means around 25 years, unless it is life without parole. And a vicious murder/predator will victimize prisoners that are in there for lesser offenses and weaker than them. They still brutalize others, they just dont have to pay bus fare to get home
Since I think life in prison is the crueler punishment, I'd give anyone sentenced to a life (or its equivalent) the choice of opting for a shorter life sentence. My opinion is based on the choice I think I would make if I was ever faced with choosing between the two alternatives.
In a sense lifers can now choose to shorten their sentence, but exercising that option usually involves putting the life of another prisoner or prison employee at risk.
Carol, this is another of your polls that is difficult to answer simply, but I am curious if there are other Gather members who have considered the possibility of this alternative.
Why not ask, which would you prefer, if you were convicted of murder? Or why not, which would you prefer, if you were convicted of a murder you committed, or, why not, which would you prefer, if you were convicted of a murder you didn't commit? Or, how about, if you were convicted of a murder you didn't remember committing, but thought you probably did commit?
Or, honestly now, are you more interested in seeing justice, or in taking revenge? Do you believe punishment stops crime? If you saw a hundred scientific studies of human behavior which showed conclusively that punishment did not deter crime, and in fact might even increase crime rates, would that change your opinion?
I found your comment, "Or, how about, if you were convicted of a murder you didn't remember committing, but thought you probably did commit?", most interesting. That very question confronts a death penalty advocate, in one of my still to be completed novels.
I think it depends on the nature of the murder and the strength of the evidence. Nanci has a good piont.
I know a lot of cops and the first thing they do is pick the most likely suspect and do whatever they can to find evidence that fits their assumtion. It turns into guilty untill proven innocent. How can we be sure enough to kill the accused?
If the evidence is circumstantial it should be LWOP with lots of chance for appeal.
it should be the other way around jimmy. You can have a likely suspect but the evidence should fall where it does and not be manipulated to fit a theory
Once upon a time I was all for the death penalty. My grandmother was killed by a mugger when I was 17 years old. He wound up being sentenced 7-9 years and got out in 3. However, what has changed my mind now, 20 years later is that I have found my faith again in God. Yes, I know this sounds hokey, but I feel that he is the ultimate judge and in the end people will get what is coming to them.
So, I believe in Life without parole. But I also believe that parole should be eliminated from the judicial system. If you are sentenced for 10 years for a crime, you do 10 years. No ifs, ands, or buts.
wow jen that was a moving post and ty you all for your comments its not an easy question. Human beings are flawed we do make errors and the error you cant walk away from is the death penalty. One innocent man or woman put to death would have to give us reason for pause
I think they should get the death penalty I see no need to feed and clothe and give them a place to stay for the rest of their sorry lives. But sometimes when you get life in prison you still get out. For example my brother in-law was seperated from his wife who he abused physically and mentally throughout their marriage. He waited for her to come to where she was living (at a neighbors house) and shot her point blank 23 times. The kids were inside the house, he turned himself in and his sorry family, all but my ex wife took his side. This is why I never liked these people. But anyhow he is supposed to be coming up for parole in a couple of years I think and hopefully my ex and her sister in laws family can find just cause to keep him in until he dies. So he took his wife's life and screwed his three daughters up for life and the legal syustem is going to let him try again, can somebody tell me why he deserves to breathe the same air as I do? One of his excuses was he was drunk, but he had called my wife the night he did it and told her she might be seeing him on the news so he knew exactly what he was doing. He needed to be shot 23 times or more.
And I did a paper on th cost of housing, feeding, clothing and medical bills and if I remember it was a lot of money to be spending on a worthless human being, so I can't see how putting somebody's ass in the electric chair can cost more. If its too high call the electric company and get levelized billing! They should be found guilty without a shadow of a doubt, senteneced and sat in an electric chair before they even leave the courthouse, that way it's easier on the victims family because they don't have to make a speacial trip to watch later on.
I know Carol thats what i'm saying, if they admit to doing it they should be dead not waiting to get out. It makes me sick! And you know the first people he's going to look for are his kids, they don't need him or want him. There's no explaination he can give that will make it better.
dont wry about it dan ty Don and Kathy one about someone who blows up an airplane we should send one up with him on it follow my thinking others would get hurt again
How about this ... In lieu of a death penalty ... put the convicted on a row boat in the middle of the ocean (Atlantic or Pacific, whichever happens to be closer). No fishing rod or line, of course, but consider providing oars.
mary why should somebody get executed for killing a kid and not get executed for killing an adult? just asking i think they should get what they give...period
I didn't see Jen's post until now. Parole is a decent way to allow someone back into society with some structure--a parole agent can assist, if he/she is a good parole agent, with getting a parolee to the right areas for job assistance, agencies for schooling, substance abuse, etc. If you wait until the person discharges, then you are putting someone out of prison with absolutely nothing...and then you're gonna scream when he commits a crime. And I'm gonna sit here and say, "Well you're the person who wanted retribution instead of rehabilitation--what did you expect?" We don't rehabilitate in prison because the public doesn't want to spend the money which is so stupid. All studies have shown that if a person leaves the same way s/he came in, good chance the door will be revolving. The recidivism rate drops dramatically with education(inmates that don't have a GED come back something like 70% of the time, if they leave with a GED, that drops to under 50%--that means we have 20% more paying taxes!). It drops even more with substance abuse treatment and good mental health treatment, but all of these are long term and cost money(and also cut into a big money making venture for politicians who want to scare up votes--"WE NEED TO LOCK UP THE CRIMINALS!!!!!").....Sorry, you hit one of my soap box buttons....I'll step down now.
No kim please as you have made some good points. My question who have to follow with when is debt to society really paid if ever at all. How of us but for the grace of god? We cut these folks loose from prison no better than when they went in but now with a felony.
It depends on the brutality of the crime. Death is acceptable in some situations, and life in prision, or less, is acceptable in other situations. People like Jeffrey Dahmer deserve be executed, and others dont.
Actually, I like the way the Chinese execute prisoners. No gas chambers, no lethal injection, no time consuming appeals. Just a bullet in the back of the head after the trial.
Is it wrong to sentence people like Jeffrey Dahmer, who raped, ate, and killed (sometimes in that order) 17+ people, to death? I find very few convincing arguments that can justifty keeping people like that alive. Or what about people like Saddam Hussein? Or Augustin Bizimungu?
two more arguements there ty first is was he mentally ill and the second is how do we learn if we keep killing our mistakes off. But the third is me didnt last very long once in general populatiion. Prisons have their own justice system which is much cheaper and more expidiant than ours. I believe in a higher judgement.
That does not change the fact that he was a monster. I dont think any prision is bad enough for people like Dahmer or Saddam or Bizimungu. People like that deserve to die. They lose their right to live if they do something like that.
Dahmer at his request was put into General Population he lasted a week. Prison justice is swift and complete and cheap. I just dont believe that Saddam got a fair trial it was impossible. Why was everyone is such a rush? If he were guilty then couldnt we assume that those who provided with arms, delivery systems, guidance systems during that period of time as well as having knowledge of chemical weapons, could be help accountable as well? Think outside the box ty. I dont make life and death decisions because as human being I know that I am flawed. if this is too slow you can email me at cyberdrifter@verizon.net.
i believe it depends on the severity of the crime. and if the prisoner gets life without parole, they should not get any of lifes enjoyments, only the bare minimum for survival.
Karen, thats a different argument. It could be like punishing a gun salesmen because he sold a gun that killed somebody. Under that argument, Every single government official since FDR (and a few before) would be guilty.
probably Ty but I would have loved to see more questions answer for history's sake. But I don't think it was just a rush because we might have been embarrassed. But in the Iraqi Constitution you cannot execute someone who has reached the age of 70. His Th would have been in April. I prayed for his soul that day. They sure didn't give anyone enough time for a stay. That is for sure. I called email and everyone was gone for a long holiday weekend. I took no pleasure in this mans death and if the shia thought he would break they were disappointed. He died like a man. tough old bird but to be in power that long in that part of the world you have to be.
Please provide details below to help Gather review this content. If it is found to be inappropriate and in violation of the Gather Terms of Service, action will be taken.
Please select the part of the post you are reporting.
Please select why you are reporting this content.
Please enter a description.
You have successfully submitted a report for this post.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 95
I have no problem with the death penalty in principle but I do not think our justice system is good enough to allow us to feel comfortable imposing it.
I've heard that it's less costly to leave them in jail for life. I don't see how that is possible. Probably years and years of appealing it. Maybe they should put a limit on appeals. One appeal and that's it. If they are convicted again in a court of their peers then lights out, and quickly, not allowing them to stay housed for years waiting to be put to death. Prisons would be less crowded, courts would free up because they wouldn't have to hear these cases over and over, and who knows maybe the murder rates would go down if the punishment fit the crime.
And before you ask if I could push the button, administer the lethal injection or flip the switch......You betcha!
My sister-in-law was murdered and I had 2 friends murdered. All were raped and strangled. All different people, all different cities, none of them knew eachother, and all of their killers are now free, let out after serving their sentences. Where's the justice in that?
Charles Manson is a constant threat to the guards, he throws any and all bodily fluids on them and is in general a pain in the ass.
Plus Manson has got to live to see his notoriety, his victims did not.
In alot of states, life means around 25 years, unless it is life without parole.
And a vicious murder/predator will victimize prisoners that are in there for lesser offenses and weaker than them. They still brutalize others, they just dont have to pay bus fare to get home
In a sense lifers can now choose to shorten their sentence, but exercising that option usually involves putting the life of another prisoner or prison employee at risk.
Carol, this is another of your polls that is difficult to answer simply, but I am curious if there are other Gather members who have considered the possibility of this alternative.
Or, honestly now, are you more interested in seeing justice, or in taking revenge? Do you believe punishment stops crime? If you saw a hundred scientific studies of human behavior which showed conclusively that punishment did not deter crime, and in fact might even increase crime rates, would that change your opinion?
I found your comment, "Or, how about, if you were convicted of a murder you didn't remember committing, but thought you probably did commit?", most interesting. That very question confronts a death penalty advocate, in one of my still to be completed novels.
I think it depends on the nature of the murder and the strength of the evidence. Nanci has a good piont.
I know a lot of cops and the first thing they do is pick the most likely suspect and do whatever they can to find evidence that fits their assumtion. It turns into guilty untill proven innocent. How can we be sure enough to kill the accused?
If the evidence is circumstantial it should be LWOP with lots of chance for appeal.
I agree with your last comment.
So, I believe in Life without parole. But I also believe that parole should be eliminated from the judicial system. If you are sentenced for 10 years for a crime, you do 10 years. No ifs, ands, or buts.
For example my brother in-law was seperated from his wife who he abused physically and mentally throughout their marriage. He waited for her to come to where she was living (at a neighbors house) and shot her point blank 23 times. The kids were inside the house, he turned himself in and his sorry family, all but my ex wife took his side. This is why I never liked these people. But anyhow he is supposed to be coming up for parole in a couple of years I think and hopefully my ex and her sister in laws family can find just cause to keep him in until he dies.
So he took his wife's life and screwed his three daughters up for life and the legal syustem is going to let him try again, can somebody tell me why he deserves to breathe the same air as I do?
One of his excuses was he was drunk, but he had called my wife the night he did it and told her she might be seeing him on the news so he knew exactly what he was doing. He needed to be shot 23 times or more.
It's not the sentence that's the problem, it's the wrongful prosecution.
It's not the sentence that's the problem, it's the wrongful prosecution.
It's not the sentence that's the problem, it's the wrongful prosecution.
We don't rehabilitate in prison because the public doesn't want to spend the money which is so stupid. All studies have shown that if a person leaves the same way s/he came in, good chance the door will be revolving.
The recidivism rate drops dramatically with education(inmates that don't have a GED come back something like 70% of the time, if they leave with a GED, that drops to under 50%--that means we have 20% more paying taxes!). It drops even more with substance abuse treatment and good mental health treatment, but all of these are long term and cost money(and also cut into a big money making venture for politicians who want to scare up votes--"WE NEED TO LOCK UP THE CRIMINALS!!!!!").....Sorry, you hit one of my soap box buttons....I'll step down now.