Thursday, November 5, 2009
Smart man Sam, smart man
I think that even though he may have simply been joking around Sam is seriously onto something. By having convicts that would be put to death go to work it satisfies the two opposite sides of the spectrum involved in this debate. Not only would this make criminals responsible for violent offences pay for their crimes, the would also PAY for their crimes, literally. Using them as a free workforce they could pay for their incarceration and no tears would be shed over the death of some psychotic violent offender. The only issue would be finding away to make the appeals process for slave work in Siberia less expensive than current capital punishment costs. Who knows, maybe governments could even make money from these criminals in the long run. The best part is that they are there to suffer for their crimes so workplace safety comittees wouldn't be complaining about the horrendous working conditions. Im not saying we torture these people, but life certainly would not be as esasy as I'm sure they have it in a secure prison, which is hardly fitting punishment for some of these wastes of skin. My God we are good. What should we tackle next? Solving global warming with icecubes and solar powered airconditioners perhaps...
Sam, I think your on to something.
Say we take these prisoners that no body wants anyways. Ship them to Siberia in the middle of nowhere where they can work. They can chop down trees or shovel rocks, then we can take these resources and sell them. Or we can take the revenue from these guys to pay for their stay so all of a sudden, it doesn't cost anything to keep these guys alive, their no longer an economic burden and they are no longer a threat to anybody. Unless the rapist starts eyeing the trees, but trees don't care if they take it in the knot. And I'm not advocating rights for trees.
Say we take these prisoners that no body wants anyways. Ship them to Siberia in the middle of nowhere where they can work. They can chop down trees or shovel rocks, then we can take these resources and sell them. Or we can take the revenue from these guys to pay for their stay so all of a sudden, it doesn't cost anything to keep these guys alive, their no longer an economic burden and they are no longer a threat to anybody. Unless the rapist starts eyeing the trees, but trees don't care if they take it in the knot. And I'm not advocating rights for trees.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Death Penalty is also KILLING the ECONOMY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I completely agree with Kelsey. The capital punishment is not only swallowing the victim but also killing the economy. The death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison, and financial resources are scarce. The question is whether the death penalty is a wise use of scarce resources that could be used to more effectively prevent and reduce crime.
As you may already know, homicide rates and rates of violent crime are higher in states and regions with the death penalty than in those without it.
Many people wonder why and at what stage the death penalty process is so expensive. The bulk of the expenses are upfront, for pre trial investigations and the actual initial trial. How come??
• more pre-trial time will be needed to prepare: cases typically take a year to come to trial
• more pre-trial motions will be filed and answered
• more experts will be hired
• twice as many attorneys will be appointed for the defense, and a comparable team for the prosecution
• jurors will have to be individually quizzed on their views about the death penalty, and they are more likely to be sequestered
• two trials instead of one will be conducted: one for guilt and one for punishment
• the trial will be longer: a cost study at Duke University estimated that death penalty trials take 3 to 5 times longer than typical murder trials
Here's an excerpt from a state report that gives some idea of the extent of the costs:
Kansas: “The study counted death penalty case costs through to execution and found that the median death penalty case costs $1.26 million. Non-death penalty cases were counted through to the end of incarceration and were found to have a median cost of $740,000. For death penalty cases, the pre-trial and trial level expenses were the most expensive part, 49% of the total cost. The investigation costs for death-sentence cases were about 3 times greater than for non-death cases. The trial costs for death cases were about 16 times greater than for non-death cases ($508,000 for death case; $32,000 for non-death case).” (. Kansas: Performance Audit Report: Costs Incurred for Death Penalty Cases: A K-GOAL Audit of the Department of Corrections)
Where do you draw the line?
Two wrongs do not make a right. How do you decide who to kill and who not to? If they killed more than two people? Like where do you draw the line? There is no right or fair way to decide who to kill and who not to. It doesn't even make sense.
Also, everyone has a different religion and has different beliefs. Many people believe that before someone dies they need time to do soul searching and seek forgiveness for their actions before they are able to go to heaven. So why should anyone be able to play God and decide who should die and who should live. Especially before they've had that time.
And, what about the criminal's family? Isn't it shock enough to find out their loved one or someone they once knew has commited a really bad crime and is going to jail, but to find out they are being killed as well? That doesn't seem right either.
It must be hard on the people who have that job and have to take these people's lives also. That's why they got rid of it in so many places. I'm pretty sure it's not a good or peaceful death. It is impossible or at least it should be to decide where to draw the line when it comes to people's lives.
Also, everyone has a different religion and has different beliefs. Many people believe that before someone dies they need time to do soul searching and seek forgiveness for their actions before they are able to go to heaven. So why should anyone be able to play God and decide who should die and who should live. Especially before they've had that time.
And, what about the criminal's family? Isn't it shock enough to find out their loved one or someone they once knew has commited a really bad crime and is going to jail, but to find out they are being killed as well? That doesn't seem right either.
It must be hard on the people who have that job and have to take these people's lives also. That's why they got rid of it in so many places. I'm pretty sure it's not a good or peaceful death. It is impossible or at least it should be to decide where to draw the line when it comes to people's lives.
Thoughts
Capital punishment is wrong, and I don't believe that it should even exist anywhere in the world. Yes, maybe by using the death sentence money could be saved. But you cannot compare money when it comes to people's lives. That should never be justified as a reason to kill. It is not right because the cost of someone's life is much greater than money or bettering the economy. It is not humane to kill someone no matter what crime a person commits. I understand that you need to commit a very serious crime to even be considered for the death penality, however most people that commit these serious crimes are not well.
I don't think that to commit a crime that bad a person is all there. A lot of these people are mentally ill, have horrible childhood's that have made them become someone different, and have a past that none of us could ever imagine. Some people don't know anything different. They've never known anything else but bad. Sometimes their brain didn't develop right and they don't feel emotion, there is something wrong with them and they need help.
People who commit these horrible crimes, are not people like you and me. They are not normal. They don't think or act like most people. There is always a reason for why people are the way they are. We have no idea what some of these really bad criminals have been through in their life or why they have done the things they've done.
Some people have just been through too much that they lose it. And yes, some people are just evil. They just are that way, and people who study these criminals are still trying to figure out why.
Whatever the case, it is so wrong to take the lives of these criminals. They are people too. And they need help. Killing them is not the answer. I'm not saying they shouldn't pay for the crimes they committed, I'm just saying taking their life is not the way to go about it.
I don't think that to commit a crime that bad a person is all there. A lot of these people are mentally ill, have horrible childhood's that have made them become someone different, and have a past that none of us could ever imagine. Some people don't know anything different. They've never known anything else but bad. Sometimes their brain didn't develop right and they don't feel emotion, there is something wrong with them and they need help.
People who commit these horrible crimes, are not people like you and me. They are not normal. They don't think or act like most people. There is always a reason for why people are the way they are. We have no idea what some of these really bad criminals have been through in their life or why they have done the things they've done.
Some people have just been through too much that they lose it. And yes, some people are just evil. They just are that way, and people who study these criminals are still trying to figure out why.
Whatever the case, it is so wrong to take the lives of these criminals. They are people too. And they need help. Killing them is not the answer. I'm not saying they shouldn't pay for the crimes they committed, I'm just saying taking their life is not the way to go about it.
Crazy Idea!
Nic, I can see where you are coming from and I think that we have both agreed that spending that amount of money on a prisoner is way too much. I still think that they should be punished for their immoral acts and that they should suffer the way they made their victims and their victim's families suffer.
After pondering for a while, I've come to the conclusion that both is beneficial to society and can make the scum who committed those crimes pay for what they did:
Why don't we just send all those scum bags to Siberia to work in a prison factory that would produce income to pay for their own imprisonment?! We could know that they are suffering with no cost to us! Of course all of this is without chance of bail.
After pondering for a while, I've come to the conclusion that both is beneficial to society and can make the scum who committed those crimes pay for what they did:
Why don't we just send all those scum bags to Siberia to work in a prison factory that would produce income to pay for their own imprisonment?! We could know that they are suffering with no cost to us! Of course all of this is without chance of bail.
Death Penalty does not reduce crimes.
Violence begets more violence. Statistics show that 38 states that have the death penalty, violent crimes punishable by the death penalty is not lower than in the states that do not have the death penalty. Nor has it reduced the amount of violent crime in the state. In the world, 86 other countries have abolished the death penalty for all crimes. Countries who have not executed a single person in the last 10 years are abolitionist-in-practice countries. 25 countries are abolitionist in practice countries. Of the 74 countries that retain the death penalty, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United States account for over 80% of the executions in the world. In the UK, there is no death penalty, no armed police, and yet, the crime rates are five times lower than they are in the US. Parallels can be drawn that the use of force and violence begets more force and violence. So the UK saves up lots of money which is use for better purpose, for the welfare of the society and to make further development in the country.
Poor bastards, don't kill them
Just to throw this out there and reinforce my point I managed to pull together some extra information with regards to the costs of how much extra it would affect the economy if we did practice executions.
“$200,000 to $600,000 dollars depending on the individual appeals process, but often exceeds that amount. In Maryland a study released by the Urban Institute concluded that the state had paid 37.2 million for each of the five executions since 1978”
Read more:
If you guys want to check my sources or view more info you can visit this link.
http://law.suite101.com/article.cfm/capital_punishment_costs_more_than_imprisonment#ixzz0VvknWdFx
“$200,000 to $600,000 dollars depending on the individual appeals process, but often exceeds that amount. In Maryland a study released by the Urban Institute concluded that the state had paid 37.2 million for each of the five executions since 1978”
Read more:
If you guys want to check my sources or view more info you can visit this link.
http://law.suite101.com/article.cfm/capital_punishment_costs_more_than_imprisonment#ixzz0VvknWdFx
The Truth of the Matter
I fully and completely agree with Sam's justification on the dreaded and highly disputed death penalty. Granted we can come up with all the stats and financial issues we want, which of course have an impact on society, but what ever happened to morality? Think of the victims and their families. Whatever was taken away by sick and heartless criminals can never be taken back whether it was murder or rape. The death penalty is not something that is freely given to petty criminals, it is designed to punish those who truly deserve to pay for their crimes.
As for the supposed costs that it is more expensive to execute prisoners as opposed to simply keep them imprisoned I have to disagree with Nic. Granted the costs of appeals and trials may seem to outweigh the costs of not having a death penalty, think of the options. If there is no death penalty then this means criminals will be serving consecutive life sentences to pay for their crimes. Perhaps in the short run it is more costly to execute, but think of the massive build up of consecutive life sentences and its affect on society. The financial burden caused by keeping these people alive will surely outweigh the costs of execution in the long run, not even taking into account the morality of the issue...
Point proven. Now sir, your rebuttal?
As for the supposed costs that it is more expensive to execute prisoners as opposed to simply keep them imprisoned I have to disagree with Nic. Granted the costs of appeals and trials may seem to outweigh the costs of not having a death penalty, think of the options. If there is no death penalty then this means criminals will be serving consecutive life sentences to pay for their crimes. Perhaps in the short run it is more costly to execute, but think of the massive build up of consecutive life sentences and its affect on society. The financial burden caused by keeping these people alive will surely outweigh the costs of execution in the long run, not even taking into account the morality of the issue...
Point proven. Now sir, your rebuttal?
For! For! For!
Sorry to rain on your parade here guys, but I believe that capital punishment, when necessary, is the proper thing to do. Not only will it keep people who murder the innocent and rape the defenceless should have their lives taken away from them. The justice system should run on an "eye for an eye" system. Of course sentencing a rapist to the death penalty is not taking an "eye for an eye", but the disgusting bastards who rape women and children deserve the death penalty and it is justifiable due to the fact that they have ruined another human being's life.
Think about this: If a man rapes a young girl, the average sentence for the offence is 7.5 years. SEVEN AND A HALF YEARS FOR RAPING A LITTLE GIRL! By giving a sex offender only 7 or so years for raping a little girl, we're justifying their crime and pretty much telling them to go ahead and rape that 7 year old girl, who is now only 14, again. But this time their chances of getting caught is much less since they've had 7 years in prison to figure out where they went wrong and how they could have gotten away with it.
Capital punishment is only sentenced for the most serious of crimes. So only a few of the hundreds of offenders whom are incarcerated receive the death penalty. In turn, that means; no lost jobs in prison staff, but more jobs available due to the death sentencing and the actual carrying out of the death sentence.
Think about this: If a man rapes a young girl, the average sentence for the offence is 7.5 years. SEVEN AND A HALF YEARS FOR RAPING A LITTLE GIRL! By giving a sex offender only 7 or so years for raping a little girl, we're justifying their crime and pretty much telling them to go ahead and rape that 7 year old girl, who is now only 14, again. But this time their chances of getting caught is much less since they've had 7 years in prison to figure out where they went wrong and how they could have gotten away with it.
Capital punishment is only sentenced for the most serious of crimes. So only a few of the hundreds of offenders whom are incarcerated receive the death penalty. In turn, that means; no lost jobs in prison staff, but more jobs available due to the death sentencing and the actual carrying out of the death sentence.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Against
I am going to have to support Praveer's position that it is morally wrong and that you cannot undo death. In many of cases people have been found innocent only after they are dead, they could have lived a long and lasting life after being released with their family and friends. If you support capital punishment, your supporting this.
On another token, keeping prisoners helps the economy. With every prison comes the need for people to run it. These people are regular people like you and I that are in need of work. From the guards to the construction workers who built the prison to those who maintain it; prisons create and maintain jobs. Jobs which pump money back into the economy which only provides economic growth.
Apart from being morally wrong to kill people even if they have killed, it would be impractical to kill them as it would destroy jobs and possibly throw the economy into a turn(depending on the makeup of inmates with fitting crimes for caoital punishment).
On another token, keeping prisoners helps the economy. With every prison comes the need for people to run it. These people are regular people like you and I that are in need of work. From the guards to the construction workers who built the prison to those who maintain it; prisons create and maintain jobs. Jobs which pump money back into the economy which only provides economic growth.
Apart from being morally wrong to kill people even if they have killed, it would be impractical to kill them as it would destroy jobs and possibly throw the economy into a turn(depending on the makeup of inmates with fitting crimes for caoital punishment).
Capital Punishment is wrong on many levels. Mistakes happen. In the last 35 years in the US, 130 people have been released from deathrow because they were exonerated by DNA evidence and DNA is not available in most homicide cases. If the man is in the prison and he is found innocent in the future, he can be released. But once he is dead, he cannot brought back to life. There have been so many cases where people were found innocent after their death.
Is it benefitting Society?
This definately is a controversial issue as it can be tied to many surrounding issues and concepts. a major concern is that fact that keeping a prisoner alive in a prison is very costly. The average dollar value for keeping one prisoner alive, feeding him and making sure there is a bed for them is 36000$ a year. And thats just one inmate. Now in the united states there are approxiamtely 2.5 million people incarcerated. You do the math. Do you think we could better society with more extensive social programs with that money or is it justifying its cause by keeping a killer or a rapist alive?
What is it?
Capital punishment or the death penalty, is the execution of a person by judicial process as a punishment for an offense. Crimes that can result in a death penalty are known as capital crimes or capital offences.
Ther are multiple points of view available for this topic. Some beleive that capital punishment can and will root out the evil in the world. The killers and the rapists are no more, those who abuse the world are gone and those who truly cherish life and treat others with dignity and respect deserve to live amongst others.
Another widely shared opinion is agaisnt. The idea that the point of our evolution was to make a move away fromt he barbaric society in which we used to be. Good ethics and morals tell us not to kill and that it is not humane.
What are your thoughts?
Ther are multiple points of view available for this topic. Some beleive that capital punishment can and will root out the evil in the world. The killers and the rapists are no more, those who abuse the world are gone and those who truly cherish life and treat others with dignity and respect deserve to live amongst others.
Another widely shared opinion is agaisnt. The idea that the point of our evolution was to make a move away fromt he barbaric society in which we used to be. Good ethics and morals tell us not to kill and that it is not humane.
What are your thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
