Do you believe in the death penalty?

[siti]

Not sure if anyone brought this up but I will now add the topic of resources.

I kinda wish you hadn't but OK, here goes...

In an ideal world with unlimited resources I would agree with you. We have the time, energy and resources to restore murderers. But we don't live in such a world. I would argue that we can better use the same resources that sustained a murderer in prison to help those that are more deserving. Maybe an example is to support the families of the murdered victims with the opportunity cost of imprisoning the murderer.

As callous as I sound speaking of economy around murders and homicides, it's a cold reality that I think deserves a discussion.

You mean an ideal world without state-sponsored killing - meaning that we would have trillions of dollars spare to keep a few individual murderers in jail rather killing them too? Interesting idea. I don't have time to dig into the numbers right now, but I think you'll find the math of your argument just doesn't add up. It probably costs more to have people on death row for decades of legal checks and balances before we are comfortable with the justifiability of the ultimate sanction than it would to say - well, you've done the crime, you're gonna do the time - and lock them up for the rest of their natural. And the money that it costs doesn't end up helping the victim or keeping, never mind correcting, the criminal - it goes in the lawyers' pockets.

 

[suncowiam]

I kinda wish you hadn't but OK, here goes...

You mean an ideal world without state-sponsored killing - meaning that we would have trillions of dollars spare to keep a few individual murderers in jail rather killing them too? Interesting idea. I don't have time to dig into the numbers right now, but I think you'll find the math of your argument just doesn't add up. It probably costs more to have people on death row for decades of legal checks and balances before we are comfortable with the justifiability of the ultimate sanction than it would to say - well, you've done the crime, you're gonna do the time - and lock them up for the rest of their natural. And the money that it costs doesn't end up helping the victim or keeping, never mind correcting, the criminal - it goes in the lawyer's pockets.

You're right, we should kill the lawyers too.

Whatever overhead you mentioned or haven't listed still doesnt negate the cost to sustain an inmate beyond their supposed euthanization date. I would still rather use that cost on more deserving individuals.

 

[siti]

Well, I reckon it must cost approximately between 2 and 3 times as much per year to keep a prisoner on death row compared to a prisoner in the general prison population. The average time on death row is about 15 years, and the average time for lifer from sentencing to death (natural or otherwise whilst still in the prison system) is about 37 years (average age at sentencing is about 28 and life expectancy for lifers is about 65) - so I think we should just about break even.

 

[psychoslice]

Well, I reckon it must cost approximately between 2 and 3 times as much per year to keep a prisoner on death row compared to a prisoner in the general prison population. The average time on death row is about 15 years, and the average time for lifer from sentencing to death (natural or otherwise whilst still in the prison system) is about 37 years (average age at sentencing is about 28 and life expectancy for lifers is about 65) - so I think we should just about break even.

I think peoples lives cannot be measured by money and coast, that sounds like barbarism, not a civilized why of thinking at all.

 

[siti]

I think peoples lives cannot be measured by money and coast, that sounds like barbarism, not a civilized why of thinking at all.

Yikes! But that's not what I am saying anyway - just illustrating that the oft-repeated cost-benefit defense of the death penalty is essentially groundless. I wasn't measuring people's lives just quoting a few (approximate) statistics from memory (someone might want to find the latest data but I doubt it would be significantly different).

 

[psychoslice]

Yikes! But that's not what I am saying anyway - just illustrating that the oft-repeated cost-benefit defense of the death penalty is essentially groundless. I wasn't measuring people's lives just quoting a few (approximate) statistics from memory (someone might want to find the latest data but I doubt it would be significantly different).

Well really who cares about data, we are talking about human lives, for god sake.

 

[ajay0]

Do you?

As a believer in reincarnation, I don't think death penalty effectively removes criminals from society. They get reborn again and commits the same crimes again through unconscious tendencies under a stimulative environment.

An effective spiritual education comprising the study of values, inculcation of sensitivity and loving kindness to animals, stress management, study and practice of meditation in childhood itself will be an effective antidote to crime and criminal tendencies, imho.

 

[psychoslice]

As a believer in reincarnation, I don't think death penalty effectively removes criminals from society. They get reborn again and commits the same crimes again through unconscious tendencies under a stimulative environment.

An effective spiritual education comprising the study of values, inculcation of sensitivity and loving kindness to animals, stress management, study and practice of meditation in childhood itself will be an effective antidote to crime and criminal tendencies, imho.

Yea, but no proof.

 

[ajay0]

Yea, but no proof.

Proof about what !

 

[psychoslice]

Proof about what !

reincarnation of course.

 

[siti]

Well really who cares about data,

Not you, obviously - but some people might be interested.

we are talking about human lives, for god sake.

Yes - on both sides of the scales of justice - the victims and the murderers. I agree that the state should not kill people as a matter of principle but someone else brought up the question of the financial cost of keeping murderers in jail rather than executing them. I was merely showing that that argument is essentially fallacious because even if there is a cost it is insignificant - especially when compared to the astronomical annual cost of maintaining the state-sponsored killing machines we call 'defense'. It is not barbaric or uncivilized to consider the data - but it is surely dangerous to base our thinking solely on emotion - regardless of what conclusion we reach on particular issue..."for God's sake"!

 

[Madhuri]

I do actually, but only for those who are truly a danger to the lives of others. Like serial killers, terrorists etc. And only if proven beyond reasonable doubt.

The reason I voted yes is because I don't see life imprisonment or the potential for their release back into society as reasonable alternatives. Life imprisonment is a waste of that person's life, possibly a fate worse than death, and a waste of money. And obviously release back into society is a stupid risk.

Sometimes killing is necessary, such as with self defense. Putting down someone who is a danger to society, who would go on a shooting rampage, for instance, is self defense, imo.

 

[psychoslice]

Not you, obviously - but some people might be interested. Yes - on both sides of the scales of justice - the victims and the murderers. I agree that the state should not kill people as a matter of principle but someone else brought up the question of the financial cost of keeping murderers in jail rather than executing them. I was merely showing that that argument is essentially fallacious because even if there is a cost it is insignificant - especially when compared to the astronomical annual cost of maintaining the state-sponsored killing machines we call 'defense'. It is not barbaric or uncivilized to consider the data - but it is surely dangerous to base our thinking solely on emotion - regardless of what conclusion we reach on particular issue..."for God's sake"!

Yes we shouldn't bring emotions into it, but at the same time we shouldn't bring revenge into it, which is nothing more than a emotion also.

 

[siti]

who would go on a shooting rampage

So you're advocating proactive justice like in the movie Minority Report?

 

[siti]

Yes we shouldn't bring emotions into it, but at the same time we shouldn't bring revenge into it, which is nothing more than a emotion also.

Absolutely! And as far as I can make out the real reason for wanting to retain the death penalty - but If we refute the other arguments then those in favour of the death penalty will have to face that and defend the concept of "revenge killings" as the philosophical basis for the death penalty. OK - the 'yes' voters - your turn. I'm challenging the cost argument (you can refute with data if possible but I doubt it and there would have to be a significant difference) - and obviously there's no rehabilitation for an executed person so that's it - I'm suggesting that "revenge" is your only valid reason. Can you defend that?

 

[psychoslice]

Absolutely! And as far as I can make out the real reason for wanting to retain the death penalty - but If we refute the other arguments then those in favour of the death penalty will have to face that and defend the concept of "revenge killings" as the philosophical basis for the death penalty. OK - the 'yes' voters - your turn. I'm challenging the cost argument (you can refute with data if possible but I doubt it and there would have to be a significant difference) - and obviously there's no rehabilitation for an executed person so that's it - I'm suggesting that "revenge" is your only valid reason. Can you defend that?

I can defend any thing that goes against human rights, simply because its right !!.

 

[ajay0]

reincarnation of course.

Reincarnation as a theory has better acceptance in psychiatry than before thanks to the works of Dr. Ian Stevenson, Dr. Brian Weiss and Dr. Michael Newton.

 

[psychoslice]

Reincarnation as a theory has better acceptance in psychiatry than before thanks to the works of Dr. Ian Stevenson, Dr. Brian Weiss and Dr. Michael Newton.

ha, how ridiculous that is.

 

[savagewind]

already safely behind bars -

I don't know that safely behind bars is purely possible.

 

[YmirGF]

Very much so. None of this lethal injection crap, either. Just take 'em "out back" and put a bullet in their heads. Done.

Though I vigorously oppose the death penalty, there are always those special cases that crop up that make you go, "Hmmmm."