Death Penalty Poll

[jay_a2j]

Yes, every person has an approximate dollar value, based on many factors, including level of education, age, chosen profession, etc. However, that is not my point. my point is that it is an economically sound idea to execute criminals instead of pay fro their incarceration.

Burrito..... last time I went to Taco Bell you were worth $1.99. Fair enough?

[Burrito]

Yes, every person has an approximate dollar value, based on many factors, including level of education, age, chosen profession, etc. However, that is not my point. my point is that it is an economically sound idea to execute criminals instead of pay fro their incarceration.

Burrito..... last time I went to Taco Bell you were worth $1.99. Fair enough?

Yes, you are absolutely hilarious.

What it comes down to is that I think people who are convicted of heinous crimes should be killed, and it is economically sound to do so. You think that no matter what someone does, there is no circumstance under which they deserve to die, and you are apparently willing to spend money to protect a pathetic criminals terrible life in jail.

[Symmetry]

Yes, every person has an approximate dollar value, based on many factors, including level of education, age, chosen profession, etc. However, that is not my point. my point is that it is an economically sound idea to execute criminals instead of pay fro their incarceration.

Burrito..... last time I went to Taco Bell you were worth $1.99. Fair enough?

Yes, you are absolutely hilarious.

What it comes down to is that I think people who are convicted of heinous crimes should be killed, and it is economically sound to do so. You think that no matter what someone does, there is no circumstance under which they deserve to die, and you are apparently willing to spend money to protect a pathetic criminals terrible life in jail.

And all those who were convicted and later found innocent, or not guilty of a capital crime? No appeal after conviction?

[notyou2]

Yes, every person has an approximate dollar value, based on many factors, including level of education, age, chosen profession, etc. However, that is not my point. my point is that it is an economically sound idea to execute criminals instead of pay fro their incarceration.

So basically, you are now stating that people should be valued based on "level of education, age, chosen profession, etc". Do you think this is discriminatory? So if society had a large investment in this individual, say they were poor and the state played a large part in their education, then perhaps they shouldn't be executed right away? Or should they be executed even quicker so we don't waste any more money on them?

I suppose you consider yourself a Christian as well?

[mpjh]

Good argument, but why bother? He is only trolling.

[Symmetry]

Good argument, but why bother? He is only trolling.

It's difficult to tell anymore, I've seen Glenn Beck.

[jay_a2j]

Yes, every person has an approximate dollar value, based on many factors, including level of education, age, chosen profession, etc. However, that is not my point. my point is that it is an economically sound idea to execute criminals instead of pay fro their incarceration.

Burrito..... last time I went to Taco Bell you were worth $1.99. Fair enough?

Yes, you are absolutely hilarious.

What it comes down to is that I think people who are convicted of heinous crimes should be killed, and it is economically sound to do so. You think that no matter what someone does, there is no circumstance under which they deserve to die, and you are apparently willing to spend money to protect a pathetic criminals terrible life in jail.

I have no right to judge someone else. "You have heard eye for an eye but I tell you the truth, if someone strikes you on the right cheek turn to him the other also." Yeah, I know, words of Jesus don't hold much clout with many but they do with me.


If a man kills another man, then you kill him....how are you any different?

[Burrito]

I have no right to judge someone else. "You have heard eye for an eye but I tell you the truth, if someone strikes you on the right cheek turn to him the other also." Yeah, I know, words of Jesus don't hold much clout with many but they do with me.


If a man kills another man, then you kill him....how are you any different?

I will repeat my previous analogy of soldiers in war. Would you equate the army of the aggressor, who invaded another land to rape and pillage, and the deaths that they cause, to the deaths that the soldiers defending their country cause?

[notyou2]

But $1.99burrito, you didn't respond to my post to you????

[jay_a2j]

I have no right to judge someone else. "You have heard eye for an eye but I tell you the truth, if someone strikes you on the right cheek turn to him the other also." Yeah, I know, words of Jesus don't hold much clout with many but they do with me.


If a man kills another man, then you kill him....how are you any different?

I will repeat my previous analogy of soldiers in war. Would you equate the army of the aggressor, who invaded another land to rape and pillage, and the deaths that they cause, to the deaths that the soldiers defending their country cause?

Not sure if there was a clause in the original "Tho shall not kill" commandment.


You must believe that some sin outweighs others. I can't say I believe the same.



rape > = < murder?

[Burrito]

But $1.99burrito, you didn't respond to my post to you????

Yes, every person has an approximate dollar value, based on many factors, including level of education, age, chosen profession, etc. However, that is not my point. my point is that it is an economically sound idea to execute criminals instead of pay fro their incarceration.

Burrito..... last time I went to Taco Bell you were worth $1.99. Fair enough?

Yes, you are absolutely hilarious.

What it comes down to is that I think people who are convicted of heinous crimes should be killed, and it is economically sound to do so. You think that no matter what someone does, there is no circumstance under which they deserve to die, and you are apparently willing to spend money to protect a pathetic criminals terrible life in jail.

Sure I did. Read the first sentence.

I have no right to judge someone else. "You have heard eye for an eye but I tell you the truth, if someone strikes you on the right cheek turn to him the other also." Yeah, I know, words of Jesus don't hold much clout with many but they do with me.


If a man kills another man, then you kill him....how are you any different?

I will repeat my previous analogy of soldiers in war. Would you equate the army of the aggressor, who invaded another land to rape and pillage, and the deaths that they cause, to the deaths that the soldiers defending their country cause?

Not sure if there was a clause in the original "Tho shall not kill" commandment.


You must believe that some sin outweighs others. I can't say I believe the same.



rape > = < murder?

"Thou shalt not kill" isn't part of the law, it's a made up bit up religious idealism. sorry, but I don't believe in a magical superhero controlling everything form to clouds.

Do you really think that killing a person in self defense is equal to say, killing your girlfriend because she wouldn't blow you off?

[alex951]

what could you do with a billion dollars, what about a million?

[AAFitz]

Well, on purely economic terms, a properly done execution would save tons of money that could then be put towards crime prevention.

Execution after due process of law is not the same as a street murder. It is a response to an action, an action which the perpetrator knew the consequences to. That is like claiming the killing invading, pillaging armies do is the same as the killing the defending soldiers do. All killing is not the same.

The problem is, it is impossible to give due process, without spending tons of money, so the fact of the matter is, is that it costs more to execute people, which could be theorized, to be costing lives.

Further, to insinuate that due process means you can do something, does not justify it. In the end, its simply mob rule, and that does not make it the correct decision, just unstoppable.

The semantics between a bunch of people deciding to kill someone, and someone deciding to kill someone that murdered their family are pretty slim. Its obviously a little less biased, but in the end, its the same thing.

Many allowed slavery, and had due process of law to justify it, but that never, ever, ever did justify it, and the fact that at the time, that it was the law of the land was irrelevant. The natural conclusion is that the human race is working to become more civilized, with more control, and its logical conclusion would be to eliminate most forms of violence.

For right now, capital punishment is simply legal because of mob rule, which is no different than the hangings from trees years ago. Its more complicated, with a lot more words and rituals, but its the same damn thing wrapped up with a bow on top, that justifies revenge, and there's no way to philosophically describe it differently.

[alex951]

Well, on purely economic terms, a properly done execution would save tons of money that could then be put towards crime prevention.

Execution after due process of law is not the same as a street murder. It is a response to an action, an action which the perpetrator knew the consequences to. That is like claiming the killing invading, pillaging armies do is the same as the killing the defending soldiers do. All killing is not the same.

The problem is, it is impossible to give due process, without spending tons of money, so the fact of the matter is, is that it costs more to execute people, which could be theorized, to be costing lives.

Further, to insinuate that due process means you can do something, does not justify it. In the end, its simply mob rule, and that does not make it the correct decision, just unstoppable.

The semantics between a bunch of people deciding to kill someone, and someone deciding to kill someone that murdered their family are pretty slim. Its obviously a little less biased, but in the end, its the same thing.

Many allowed slavery, and had due process of law to justify it, but that never, ever, ever did justify it, and the fact that at the time, that it was the law of the land was irrelevant. The natural conclusion is that the human race is working to become more civilized, with more control, and its logical conclusion would be to eliminate most forms of violence.

For right now, capital punishment is simply legal because of mob rule, which is no different than the hangings from trees years ago. Its more complicated, with a lot more words and rituals, but its the same damn thing wrapped up with a bow on top, that justifies revenge, and there's no way to philosophically describe it differently.

guess i just find it hard to believe that it cost more to kill a criminal than to let them live and supply them for life

[b.k. barunt]

Good argument, but why bother? He is only trolling.

Priceless.

We see here a stereotypical example here of the wisdom of our mods. Trolling? Howthefuck is that trolling??! The man comes into the thread and discusses the subject matter of the thread in a serious manner, not even attempting to inject humor or levity, and you pronounce judgement because he disagrees with you. I as a member here think we deserve better.

I don't agree with him either, but he deserves a say in the matter as much as anyone. In this case, as in many others, you are sadly the troll. How ironic.


Honibaz

[notyou2]

Yes, every person has an approximate dollar value, based on many factors, including level of education, age, chosen profession, etc. However, that is not my point. my point is that it is an economically sound idea to execute criminals instead of pay fro their incarceration.

So basically, you are now stating that people should be valued based on "level of education, age, chosen profession, etc". Do you think this is discriminatory? So if society had a large investment in this individual, say they were poor and the state played a large part in their education, then perhaps they shouldn't be executed right away? Or should they be executed even quicker so we don't waste any more money on them?

I suppose you consider yourself a Christian as well?

I fail to see your response to the above questions even though you indicated you did answer them.

[Burrito]

Yes, every person has an approximate dollar value, based on many factors, including level of education, age, chosen profession, etc. However, that is not my point. my point is that it is an economically sound idea to execute criminals instead of pay fro their incarceration.

So basically, you are now stating that people should be valued based on "level of education, age, chosen profession, etc". Do you think this is discriminatory? So if society had a large investment in this individual, say they were poor and the state played a large part in their education, then perhaps they shouldn't be executed right away? Or should they be executed even quicker so we don't waste any more money on them?

I suppose you consider yourself a Christian as well?

I fail to see your response to the above questions even though you indicated you did answer them.

Well even though this is off topic, I will still answer you. Some people are simply more valuable than others, and I am sure that there is a way to put this in dollar values. If you owned a business, and were looking to hire, who would you choose first? The burned out druggie, or the honor roll high school athlete? The president gets an entire Secret Service to protect him, while everyone else has to rely on anonymity and self-defense. Why? Because he is more valuable then an average person. Prison inmates are some of the least valuable people in this country. Even (most) illegal immigrants work hard, but inmates are in fact a drain on the hard earned money of (generally) hard working people.
I am in fact an atheist. I don't believe in a magical man in the clouds who controls everything.

[mpjh]

B.K. me thinks you protest too much.

[Burrito]

Well, he is right, because I am not trolling. I have better things to do than try to piss faceless people that are thousands of miles away off. It is much more entertaining when you are face to face. I am actually serious, not just dicking around.

[mpjh]

Sure you are.

[GabonX]

Inhumane
Doesn't deter crime
More expensive than life in prison

Your first one is an opinion, your second is unsubstantiated and the third is a load of crap.

I can kill a person for under a nickel. I don't for a second believer that they're spending more money to kill a person than to feed and cloth them for life and if they are it's because of liberal bureaucratic crap.

.22 LR to the forehead is the way to go. Doesn't get much quicker, cheaper or less painful than that.

Erm, I had five points. I'm guessing that you took the other two as unarguable. That it kills innocent people, and is frequently a cruel sentence for people who are later released.

It's inhumane for all kinds of reasons. The pain caused by incompetent lethal injection suspended the death penalty in many states. Electric chair isn't perfect either. I'm not a big fan of "death by pain".

That it's not a deterrent, I think you have me. I don't have statistics on hand. Freakonomics makes a persuasive argument about it based on the arguments of police chiefs around the US, and most psychologists would say that a psychopath would be little deterred by such rules. Basically, having or not having the death penalty doesn't reduce crime.

Death penalty cases almost always cost more. Ask to change the law, and blame those crazy liberals for not just letting all those people who escaped death row simply die if you like. They still cost more.

So why do you think it should exist?

I think it is dangerous and expensive for it not to exist. In the United States we have killers released back onto the streets not because they have been rehabilitated, but rather because there is overcrowding in prisons. A police officer recently commented about this in passing at my school and there is a proposal in California for a mass exodus of prisoners as a result of overcrowding. It is a tragically common occurrence in the US that murderers are set free and go on to kill again.

Allow me to clarify, I am not at all satisfied with the current construct of the system in place. The process takes too long which lends legitimacy to your claims that capital punishment is too expensive BUT, I submit that these out of control expenses are the result of a poorly constructed appeal process and elaborate and needlessly expensive methods of execution.

Capital Punishment should exist to prevent known violent criminals from walking freely through society. Once a capital crime is committed a person has demonstrated that they are incapable of living in harmony with their fellow man and there should be no obligation for the state to fund this person's living under alternative circumstances. Execution (theoretically) serves the purpose of removing a dangerous person from society with minimal cost to the state.

I'll take the time to address the other two points here:
I'm not sure what you mean that "it is frequently a cruel sentence for people who are later released". If a person is executed than how can they be released? If they were released they could not have been executed....I really don't understand what you're saying here.

The fact that it kills innocent people, in my eyes, is the one great flaw of capital punishment in it's most perfect form HOWEVER, I believe that more lives are preserved as a result of it's proper function. When killers are released without having been rehabilitated they often go on to kill again. I believe that the proper function of capital punishment reduces the total number of innocent people that will die. That said, it is a sad fact of life that innocent people are going to be killed regardless....Sad but true

[GabonX]

You may even be correct that Capital Punishment is a poor deterrent of crime. I can understand that people would be less concerned with the prospect of Capital Punishment when they see that their friends and family members have killed and that they were given a lesser sentence or were later released.

In order for capital punishment to work it needs to be run efficiently and enacted consistently for capital crimes.

[b.k. barunt]

Well even though this is off topic, I will still answer you. Some people are simply more valuable than others, and I am sure that there is a way to put this in dollar values. If you owned a business, and were looking to hire, who would you choose first? The burned out druggie, or the honor roll high school athlete? The president gets an entire Secret Service to protect him, while everyone else has to rely on anonymity and self-defense. Why? Because he is more valuable then an average person. Prison inmates are some of the least valuable people in this country. Even (most) illegal immigrants work hard, but inmates are in fact a drain on the hard earned money of (generally) hard working people.
I am in fact an atheist. I don't believe in a magical man in the clouds who controls everything.

Most of my gut level response to such arrogant ignorance would be considered "flaming", so i'll try to candy coat it for you.

Your being an atheist does not give you the right to set yourself up as a little tin god and deem who is "more valuable" and who is not. I know at least 6 or 7 "burned out druggies" who are decorated vets - one who was given the Congressional Medal of Honor. I guess they've outlived their usefulness (especially the one with no legs) on your scale of value. Nevertheless, if we were to take any one of them and compare their "value" when they were your age to your "value" now, you'd come up embarrassingly shy.

You are a shining (in the glaring sense) example of a society who judges a man's "value" by his financial status. Your laws protect the rich and oppress the poor, which is why no rich man was ever executed unjustly in the last 200 years or so, but we have a shitload of poor dead suckers.

If someone rapes or kills one of my family or close friends, i will kill them. Do i want the government to have that right? f*ck no! I think they've already shown anyone with half a brain that they're not capable of applying it in a fair and equitable manner. Anyone who is for the death penalty doesn't give a shit about the hundreds of innocent men and women who have been put to death, as it doesn't affect them in the least bit if that person is outside of a small circle of friends.

Honibaz

[GabonX]

I think he is touching on some legitimate concepts bk, but that his presentation is very poor. If he really believes that a person's income should affect judgment in a court of law I can't defend his position, but what I think he is trying to say is that society has no obligation to indefinately fund the existence of convicted murderers.

Also, your comment about no rich man being executed unjustly in the last 200 years may be applicable in the United States, but if you were a Jew in Germany in the 30's, or had money in Eastern Europe or Russia and wanted to keep it in the era of the Iron Curtain circumstances were very different, not that these things are at all relevant to the current debate...

[Burrito]

I think he is touching on some legitimate concepts bk, but that his presentation is very poor. If he really believes that a person's income should affect judgment in a court of law I can't defend his position, but what I think he is trying to say is that society has no obligation to indefinately fund the existence of convicted murderers.

Also, your comment about no rich man being executed unjustly in the last 200 years may be applicable in the United States, but if you were a Jew in Germany in the 30's, or had money in Eastern Europe or Russia and wanted to keep it in the era of the Iron Curtain circumstances were very different, not that these things are at all relevant to the current debate...

I didn't mean that a mans financial \status should have anything to do with how he is judged in a criminal case. I wasn't even intending to relate it to this debate, which is why I started off with "this is off topic".

Well even though this is off topic, I will still answer you. Some people are simply more valuable than others, and I am sure that there is a way to put this in dollar values. If you owned a business, and were looking to hire, who would you choose first? The burned out druggie, or the honor roll high school athlete? The president gets an entire Secret Service to protect him, while everyone else has to rely on anonymity and self-defense. Why? Because he is more valuable then an average person. Prison inmates are some of the least valuable people in this country. Even (most) illegal immigrants work hard, but inmates are in fact a drain on the hard earned money of (generally) hard working people.
I am in fact an atheist. I don't believe in a magical man in the clouds who controls everything.

Most of my gut level response to such arrogant ignorance would be considered "flaming", so i'll try to candy coat it for you.

Your being an atheist does not give you the right to set yourself up as a little tin god and deem who is "more valuable" and who is not. I know at least 6 or 7 "burned out druggies" who are decorated vets - one who was given the Congressional Medal of Honor. I guess they've outlived their usefulness (especially the one with no legs) on your scale of value. Nevertheless, if we were to take any one of them and compare their "value" when they were your age to your "value" now, you'd come up embarrassingly shy.

You are a shining (in the glaring sense) example of a society who judges a man's "value" by his financial status. Your laws protect the rich and oppress the poor, which is why no rich man was ever executed unjustly in the last 200 years or so, but we have a shitload of poor dead suckers.

If someone rapes or kills one of my family or close friends, i will kill them. Do i want the government to have that right? f*ck no! I think they've already shown anyone with half a brain that they're not capable of applying it in a fair and equitable manner. Anyone who is for the death penalty doesn't give a shit about the hundreds of innocent men and women who have been put to death, as it doesn't affect them in the least bit if that person is outside of a small circle of friends.

Honibaz

First: I respect those people you are talking about for what they have done in the past. I can think of no one more deserving of government care then a man who lost his legs serving his country. However, if since then they have become depressed, started using drugs, and living off my taxes, with little more in the way of being productive since they were soldiers, then I cannot sit by while they waste the rest of their life feeling sorry for themselves.
There is no need to make the argument personal, but as a matter of fact, I am a straight A, honor roll student who is enlisting in the Marines right out of high school.

Capitalism, one of the main forces behind the reason that America is the most powerful country in the world (at least for now) revolves around money, and therefore much of our society does as well. While I understand why you would say no rich man has been executed unjustly, I doubt that it is true. Or perhaps rich men aren't as prone to rape and murder? Or there are simply a shitload more poor people in jail then there are rich ones.

I understand your sentiment of wanting to personally f*ck anyone up who messes with you, your close friends, or your family, but for a functioning society, stuff like that simply cannot happen. There would be no end to it.
I believe that someone quoted an article earlier in this debate that there was something like 136 people taken off death row since 1975. That is what, 4 people a year? I know that they shouldn't have died, but just because a few innocents might die, doesn't mean that the taxpayers should have to pay for someone's life in the big house.