The death penalty makes no sense.

[Jehanne]

Oh really? I wasn't aware that killing would be more expensive. I have heard about jails being profitable, and that itself being an issue.

My concerns are more about dangerous people escaping, but I think that's probably too rare to justify an argument.

I hadn't put enough thought into the issues when I previously held my pro-penalty position. This forum was actually the catalyst to thinking it all through more carefully, maybe 3 years ago now, and I changed my mind. I was thinking of making a thread about what issues this forum has caused people to reconsider.

1.Death row is quite expensive 

2.Indeed it's is rare 

Really the one argument i have seen that might work is the notion the idea that it's crueler to jail someone for life then kill them . I argue that a prisoner should be given the option  to die if they want .As i don't view suffer as equal to justice.

Not only that, it's rarely even applied:

DPIC -- 2 percent of counties have death sentences.

[Amarok]

1.Death row is quite expensive 

2.Indeed it's is rare 

Really the one argument i have seen that might work is the notion the idea that it's crueler to jail someone for life then kill them . I argue that a prisoner should be given the option  to die if they want .As i don't view suffer as equal to justice.

Not only that, it's rarely even applied:

DPIC -- 2 percent of counties have death sentences.

That too

[Aegon]

It's bad enough people serve prison time for crimes they didn't commit, let alone DIE for something they were wrongfully accused of.

[Brian37]

1) Overcrowded jails make it worth it
2) Burden on society is lessened
3) Punishment to those that fear death is still a punishment.
4) He took a life, he can give a life.

No it is not. 

1. Over crowed prisons are a result of over charging people for mostly non violent offenses. The private contracts for prisons lead to the push to put more bodies in them. It isn't about punishing anyone, it is about sub contractors making tons of money.

2. It costs tax payers far more to prosecute a death penalty case with all the appeals than it is to simply give them life in prison.

3. No, someone that violent has no empathy for others, it is simply state sponsored revenge.

4. The criminal justice system with all crimes is not funded to protect the poor, and in many cases even those in the middle class. Any public defender can tell you they do not have enough lawyers to cover all the cases to an effective degree. Because of such it makes it that more easy to harm someone who isn't rich enough to hire a fleet of lawyers.

You are oversimplifying your argument based on emotion, not real legal issues.

I have personally talked to a man who was let out of prison who was on death row, because it was proven that the prosecutor left out evidence during discovery that could have let the court drop the charges. To assume the system always does that to avoid hurting an innocent person is a mistake.

I have never been or ever will be for an eye for an eye justice system. Everything should be based on evidence, and punishment should not be about revenge, but containment only.

[LadyForCamus]

I’m with Mooney.  The likes of folks such as J. Dahmer, Bundy and BTK have no business taking another breath of our air.  Why should they get the privilege of life when they afforded their victims no such privilege?  They aren’t even going to die the horrific deaths they imposed on their victims.

Unless killing them brings the dead back all you have done is killed another person .What's robbing one person of live going to do other then robbing one more person of life ? That sounds unhelpful .

Why should a person like BTK get to continue living?

[Brian37]

Unless killing them brings the dead back all you have done is killed another person .What's robbing one person of live going to do other then robbing one more person of life ? That sounds unhelpful .

Why should a person like BTK get to continue living?

Holy crap, nobody gives a fuck about that sicko, not the point.

The point is our laws cover everyone, not just the famous people you hear about. In a perfect world I would agree, but we DON'T LIVE in a perfect world, and it is easy to armchair quarterback solely based on famous cases. 

I just told you WHY it is a bad thing. I personally talked to a man who spoke at the college I went to, whom WAS ON DEATH ROW, and why was he? Because the prosecutor DID NOT disclose evidence to the defense that would have PREVENTED the charges from being filed in the first place. AND I also talked to a prisoner almost executed SOLELY based on the testimony of another prisoner. Prisoners can and do lie to get more privilege in prison.

You cannot take a small sample and base your parameters based on that one sample. EVEN outside the issue of murder, if you do not have the money like a rich person, it is harder for you to defend yourself solely with the help of a public defender.

In a perfect world I'd agree, but since our justice system DOES NOT FUND public defenders enough to defend their overwhelming case loads, mistakes can and are made all the time. 

THAT GOES WITH ANY CRIME, not just the famous ones you hear about.

---

It's bad enough people serve prison time for crimes they didn't commit, let alone DIE for something they were wrongfully accused of.

BINGO!

When you watch the news everyday for DECADES like I have, to say someone never gets falsely accused or wrongfully convicted is patently absurd. And even in cases of false confessions, to say those things never happen is also absurd.

And again, that isn't just with charges of murder, that is with any crime one could be charged with.

If you base it on containment, not revenge, if a mistake is made, that innocent person has an opportunity to get out of prison.

[LadyForCamus]

Why should a person like BTK get to continue living?

Holy crap, nobody gives a fuck about that sicko, not the point.

The point is our laws cover everyone, not just the famous people you hear about. In a perfect world I would agree, but we DON'T LIVE in a perfect world, and it is easy to armchair quarterback solely based on famous cases. 

I just told you WHY it is a bad thing. I personally talked to a man who spoke at the college I went to, whom WAS ON DEATH ROW, and why was he? Because the prosecutor DID NOT disclose evidence to the defense that would have PREVENTED the charges from being filed in the first place. AND I also talked to a prisoner almost executed SOLELY based on the testimony of another prisoner. Prisoners can and do lie to get more privilege in prison.

You cannot take a small sample and base your parameters based on that one sample. EVEN outside the issue of murder, if you do not have the money like a rich person, it is harder for you to defend yourself solely with the help of a public defender.

In a perfect world I'd agree, but since our justice system DOES NOT FUND public defenders enough to defend their overwhelming case loads, mistakes can and are made all the time. 

THAT GOES WITH ANY CRIME, not just the famous ones you hear about.

BTK wasn’t meant to be my whole argument in favor of the death penalty; Jesus. That was simply my
response to Tiz’s pointed question. Sometimes it feels like you are talking at me, instead of to me. I will concede that it makes no pragmatic sense considering the facts, and it should be stopped if even one innocent person is wrongfully executed, which I understand happens. I’m simply saying that if there was a way we could prevent that from ever happening again, then I would have no moral objection to executing people the likes of the BTK.

[Brian37]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/16/us/ny-wro...index.html

This is one case of an innocent person ending up in prison for a murder they did not commit.

And here is a long history of wrongful convictions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wr...ted_States

And things like thee above are why this org exists.

https://www.innocenceproject.org/

---

Holy crap, nobody gives a fuck about that sicko, not the point.

The point is our laws cover everyone, not just the famous people you hear about. In a perfect world I would agree, but we DON'T LIVE in a perfect world, and it is easy to armchair quarterback solely based on famous cases. 

I just told you WHY it is a bad thing. I personally talked to a man who spoke at the college I went to, whom WAS ON DEATH ROW, and why was he? Because the prosecutor DID NOT disclose evidence to the defense that would have PREVENTED the charges from being filed in the first place. AND I also talked to a prisoner almost executed SOLELY based on the testimony of another prisoner. Prisoners can and do lie to get more privilege in prison.

You cannot take a small sample and base your parameters based on that one sample. EVEN outside the issue of murder, if you do not have the money like a rich person, it is harder for you to defend yourself solely with the help of a public defender.

In a perfect world I'd agree, but since our justice system DOES NOT FUND public defenders enough to defend their overwhelming case loads, mistakes can and are made all the time. 

THAT GOES WITH ANY CRIME, not just the famous ones you hear about.

BTK wasn’t meant to be my whole argument in favor of the death penalty; Jesus. That was simply my
response to Tiz’s pointed question. Sometimes it feels like you are talking at me, instead of to me. I will concede that it makes no pragmatic sense considering the facts, and it should be stopped if even one innocent person is wrongfully executed, which I understand happens. I’m simply saying that if there was a way we could prevent that from ever happening again, then I would have no moral objection to executing people the likes of the BTK.

And I am saying if you are going to concede that wrongful convictions happen, then there is no good reason to support the death penalty. We do not live in a utopia.There is no way to separate BTK from a non famous even single murder, say of a spouse, because the law, is the same no matter how many you kill, or are even falsely accused of.

Like I said, it is wrong to focus solely on the nature of the charge and seek revenge. If that festers in society, long term you end up with over zealous police, prosecutors  and a society of potential jury pools looking for revenge. THAT goes with any crime, not just murder.

[vulcanlogician]

I think the worst of the worst serial killer types are often marched out as examples to show how the death penalty might deliver just deserts. But I wonder if these fringe cases justify the use of a penalty to be meted out to all offenders of serious crimes. It's worth noting that death row is populated disproportionately with poor black males like the rest of the prison system.

On one hand, I'm sure there are some real monsters on death row. On the other hand, I'm the kind of person who would like to prevent the murders that haven't happened yet rather than "set right" the ones that have. To me, the most cost effective solution is to reach at risk kids when they are young and provide them with much-needed stability. But this is easier said than done...

[Brian37]

This morning at 10 AM CDT, the State of Nebraska is set to execute Carey Dean Moore, who says that he is "ready to die".  His victims' families approve of his upcoming execution.  But, when Mr. Moore dies a (hopefully) peaceful death, he will cease to exist, and hence, no longer suffer the punishments of prison.  In fact, if he experiences what I experienced a few days ago when I fainted while on my feet due to a brief illness (probably, mono), he will never even experience death.  Instead, he will go to sleep and then die.

In this sense, how can the death penalty be said to be "punishment"; isn't it just better to leave Mr. Moore in prison for the rest of his life if you wish to see him be punished for his heinous crimes?  Instead, Mr. Moore gets to end his life on the World stage, on the front pages of major newspapers across the Globe.

Then why do most all of them keep appealing and delaying the execution?

States are different, some are up to the convicted, in other states it is automatic. But it still amounts to human rights, and even the convicted have rights. That is what separates us from authoritarian states like North Korea, and authoritarian theocracies like Iran and Saudi Arabia.