Death Penalty? Yes or No? (95)
Radio 4, Dr David Nott described on one day a little child was brought into a hospital where he was working with his buttocks blown off and the backs of his legs.
What do you suggest the penalty for that is?
What do you suggest the penalty for that is?
mollybaby: I do see that point of view, but the innocent vulnerable members of society have to be protected first and foremost from recidivists.
You'd get that with indefinite imprisonment, but there would be avenues left for review.
The thing about a whole life tariff is there's no such re-evaluation process in place.
I kind of think a whole life tariff is more about retribution that protection of the public.
jac_the_gripper: You'd get that with indefinite imprisonment, but there would be avenues left for review.
The thing about a whole life tariff is there's no such re-evaluation process in place.
I kind of think a whole life tariff is more about retribution that protection of the public.
The thing about a whole life tariff is there's no such re-evaluation process in place.
I kind of think a whole life tariff is more about retribution that protection of the public.
Possibly, but I don't know of a viable alternative.
GUZMAN1: In my view painless means not the same as humane. There are many reasons besides pain.
As I've understood with the cocktail one loses conscience before the truly lethal injections. A little like before surgery.
As I've understood with the cocktail one loses conscience before the truly lethal injections. A little like before surgery.
Or it disables someone from expressing the pain caused.
Why this particular drug to 'anaesthetise'?
It's not used for medical anaesthesia and medical anaesthesia is not used for executions.
mollybaby: Possibly, but I don't know of a viable alternative.
Why do you think indefinite detention is not a viable alternative?
Sannu: Radio 4, Dr David Nott described on one day a little child was brought into a hospital where he was working with his buttocks blown off and the backs of his legs.
What do you suggest the penalty for that is?
such crimes...as with cold bloodied murder.....attemted....should not exspect parole....how ever long the sentence.jmo.What do you suggest the penalty for that is?
Sannu: Radio 4, Dr David Nott described on one day a little child was brought into a hospital where he was working with his buttocks blown off and the backs of his legs.
What do you suggest the penalty for that is?
What do you suggest the penalty for that is?
What was the cause?
Negligence?
Deliberate?
Sanctioned as in the case of war, or not sanctioned?
excerpt from John K. Roman on Costs of the Death Penalty Judiciary Committee Delaware Senate
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on SB 19. The death penalty is one of the most polarizing social issues under debate today. Few debates, however, are undertaken with as little empirical evidence as is available in the debate about capital punishment. While there are substantial disagreements about most aspects of the death penalty, there is a consensus about one important data point: having a death penalty is more expensive for a state than not having the death penalty. In 2007 and 2008 I led a team at the Urban Institute that studied this question, and I would like to report the results of the study.
We find that the total costs of a typical murder case in Maryland are about $1 million, including post- trial incarceration. Capital eligible cases where prosecutors filed notice that they would seek the death penalty but where no death penalty was imposed cost almost $700,000 more than cases where prosecutors could have—but did not—seek the death penalty. When a death sentence was imposed, the total added costs were $1.8 million. We estimate that the total lifetime cost to Maryland taxpayers of murder cases where a death penalty is sought is $186 million. These numbers would be even higher, but few death sentences are imposed, and few of those result in an execution.
While these data are particular to Maryland, all 14 prior studies of the death penalty have consistently shown that the death penalty increases costs. If the death penalty were abolished, those dollars could
be used in a variety of positive ways—including returning them to Delaware taxpayers. However, hard- won experience suggests that the only way for those gains to be realized is to reallocate the public’s money now. When savings such as these can be anticipated, the best course of action is to take that money off the table. If we wait, the money will simply be spent for other purposes before there can be any public debate.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on SB 19. The death penalty is one of the most polarizing social issues under debate today. Few debates, however, are undertaken with as little empirical evidence as is available in the debate about capital punishment. While there are substantial disagreements about most aspects of the death penalty, there is a consensus about one important data point: having a death penalty is more expensive for a state than not having the death penalty. In 2007 and 2008 I led a team at the Urban Institute that studied this question, and I would like to report the results of the study.
We find that the total costs of a typical murder case in Maryland are about $1 million, including post- trial incarceration. Capital eligible cases where prosecutors filed notice that they would seek the death penalty but where no death penalty was imposed cost almost $700,000 more than cases where prosecutors could have—but did not—seek the death penalty. When a death sentence was imposed, the total added costs were $1.8 million. We estimate that the total lifetime cost to Maryland taxpayers of murder cases where a death penalty is sought is $186 million. These numbers would be even higher, but few death sentences are imposed, and few of those result in an execution.
While these data are particular to Maryland, all 14 prior studies of the death penalty have consistently shown that the death penalty increases costs. If the death penalty were abolished, those dollars could
be used in a variety of positive ways—including returning them to Delaware taxpayers. However, hard- won experience suggests that the only way for those gains to be realized is to reallocate the public’s money now. When savings such as these can be anticipated, the best course of action is to take that money off the table. If we wait, the money will simply be spent for other purposes before there can be any public debate.
What about the other spectrum of the debate - is it Finland? Sweden? that allow the assisted killing of those with terminal illness?
jac_the_gripper: What was the cause?
Negligence?
Deliberate?
Sanctioned as in the case of war, or not sanctioned?
Negligence?
Deliberate?
Sanctioned as in the case of war, or not sanctioned?
Do you think any of the above really matters to some people, concerning cases of such brutality?
Think how others might feel, on a personal basis put yourself in their position and understand their feelings and emotions, their culture too, then one might just find themselves thinking in binary mode whether they like it or not.
Because all cases of such brutality committed in this world carry a whole unknown weight of emotions with them, that is not baggage, that is as real as it gets. Feel the pain and it is so bloody shocking.
How do you think that little boy felt, can you imagine it?
Too many boxes having to be ticked, strip them away.
I think the debate has slipped a little off course, because we are asking to make a value judgement on individual cases - when it is up to the legal systems in our respective countries that make the judgement of who and how and why someone is sentenced to death
The real question is should under the standard judicial process be a place for imposing the death penalty. Not on a case by case basis but on the matter of law - I mean if the individual state says that only cases in which the person kills in a depraved manner or what ever is the standard, and after a death sentence trial with a full jury and then the aggravating and mitigating phase to determine if the death penalty is imposed.
Which is why it takes 10 to 12 years and is very expensive....
Should the death penalty be an option for the individual states and country?
It is not asking us to be judge and jury - but to step above the cases and make a general statement about a country or state's right to impose death?
The real question is should under the standard judicial process be a place for imposing the death penalty. Not on a case by case basis but on the matter of law - I mean if the individual state says that only cases in which the person kills in a depraved manner or what ever is the standard, and after a death sentence trial with a full jury and then the aggravating and mitigating phase to determine if the death penalty is imposed.
Which is why it takes 10 to 12 years and is very expensive....
Should the death penalty be an option for the individual states and country?
It is not asking us to be judge and jury - but to step above the cases and make a general statement about a country or state's right to impose death?
Sannu: Do you think any of the above really matters to some people, concerning cases of such brutality?
Think how others might feel, on a personal basis put yourself in their position and understand their feelings and emotions, their culture too, then one might just find themselves thinking in binary mode whether they like it or not.
Because all cases of such brutality committed in this world carry a whole unknown weight of emotions with them, that is not baggage, that is as real as it gets. Feel the pain and it is so bloody shocking.
How do you think that little boy felt, can you imagine it?
Too many boxes having to be ticked, strip them away.
Think how others might feel, on a personal basis put yourself in their position and understand their feelings and emotions, their culture too, then one might just find themselves thinking in binary mode whether they like it or not.
Because all cases of such brutality committed in this world carry a whole unknown weight of emotions with them, that is not baggage, that is as real as it gets. Feel the pain and it is so bloody shocking.
How do you think that little boy felt, can you imagine it?
Too many boxes having to be ticked, strip them away.
So, you don't think a gas engineer who made a mistake should be treated differently from someone who deliberately caused an explosion with the aim to maim and kill?
Human error should perhaps carry mandatory whole life tariffs?
jac_the_gripper: So, you don't think a gas engineer who made a mistake should be treated differently from someone who deliberately caused an explosion with the aim to maim and kill?
Human error should perhaps carry mandatory whole life tariffs?
Human error should perhaps carry mandatory whole life tariffs?
and on this particular for example in Florida there are minimum mandatory sentencing guidelines - for trafficking in drugs - so, are you saying that there should be mandatory sentences. Of course this is after a trial because before a trial often a case is offered lessor sentences to plead guilty.
and now that corporations in America are considered individuals - how do you sentence the entire board of directors who through their greed deliberately cause an explosion - should they all get a life sentence?
jac_the_gripper: So, you don't think a gas engineer who made a mistake should be treated differently from someone who deliberately caused an explosion with the aim to maim and kill?
Human error should perhaps carry mandatory whole life tariffs?
Human error should perhaps carry mandatory whole life tariffs?
Come on you can do a lot better than using that as an example. You are a person who is a thinker by nature, not some fruitbat with generalization tattooed on their forehead. In fact it was a ludicrous example, that of course does need to be evaluated too, in time, one cannot discount.
Human error is not necessarily without intent either, though in the your gas man case there is no intent, that would simply be unspeakable, a gas man roaming round creating gas leaks!.
Don't avoid or maneuver to much, it is lacking.
jac_the_gripper: Or it disables someone from expressing the pain caused.
Why this particular drug to 'anaesthetise'?
It's not used for medical anaesthesia and medical anaesthesia is not used for executions.
Why this particular drug to 'anaesthetise'?
It's not used for medical anaesthesia and medical anaesthesia is not used for executions.
Sorry, but you're wrong. Sodium Pentothal has both uses.
I'm not denying that execution always means suffering, for example by anguish. But laws over certain matters only are developed to punish, and that's all.
Maybe might be the culprit who should choose between long-life prison and death penalty.
Sannu: Come on you can do a lot better than using that as an example. You are a person who is a thinker by nature, not some fruitbat with generalization tattooed on their forehead. In fact it was a ludicrous example, that of course does need to be evaluated too, in time, one cannot discount.
Human error is not necessarily without intent either, though in the your gas man case there is no intent, that would simply be unspeakable, a gas man roaming round creating gas leaks!.
Don't avoid or maneuver to much, it is lacking.
Human error is not necessarily without intent either, though in the your gas man case there is no intent, that would simply be unspeakable, a gas man roaming round creating gas leaks!.
Don't avoid or maneuver to much, it is lacking.
Your critique is about me, not my argument.
jac_the_gripper: Your critique is about me, not my argument.
Both of you have gotten into the specific cases that "muddy the waters" so to speak.
It is not about becoming the judge and jury in individual examples but about a general concept that the death penalty can be imposed and useful in cases of (insert the general case)
The judge and jury will impose the sentence. the prosecutors or state are the ones that say x case is a death penalty case .....
Don't you think so?
jac_the_gripper: So, you don't think a gas engineer who made a mistake should be treated differently from someone who deliberately caused an explosion with the aim to maim and kill?
Human error should perhaps carry mandatory whole life tariffs?
Human error should perhaps carry mandatory whole life tariffs?
If the gas man has commited similar mistakes previously, a negligence that costs lives or could cost should be punished.
Perhaps not intentional, but what if the gas blast or fire kills many?
GUZMAN1: Sorry, but you're wrong. Sodium Pentothal has both uses.
not denying that execution always means suffering, for example by anguish. But laws over certain matters only are developed to punish, and that's all.
Maybe might be the culprit who should choose between long-life prison and death penalty.
not denying that execution always means suffering, for example by anguish. But laws over certain matters only are developed to punish, and that's all.
Maybe might be the culprit who should choose between long-life prison and death penalty.
Thank you for the link, Guz.
I misunderstood the shortage issue.
I found the anaesthesia being used for caesarian sections interesting. I know someone who felt everything even though she was unconscious, as I did having a spinal anaesthetic. As I understand it, the realisation that some people feel everything under anaesthetic is currently being researched.
The wiki article also pointed to executed prisoners having too low a dose of the drug in their system to achieve unconsciousness. Given it only lasts for 5-10 minutes, I think it said, there seems to be a lot of room for error.
JeanKimberley: Both of you have gotten into the specific cases that "muddy the waters" so to speak.
It is not about becoming the judge and jury in individual examples but about a general concept that the death penalty can be imposed and useful in cases of (insert the general case)
The judge and jury will impose the sentence. the prosecutors or state are the ones that say x case is a death penalty case .....
Don't you think so?
It is not about becoming the judge and jury in individual examples but about a general concept that the death penalty can be imposed and useful in cases of (insert the general case)
The judge and jury will impose the sentence. the prosecutors or state are the ones that say x case is a death penalty case .....
Don't you think so?
This whole subject is a matter of great controversy around the world, as has been proven on these forums before in the past. One cant generalize it at all at all.
JeanKimberley: Both of you have gotten into the specific cases that "muddy the waters" so to speak.
It is not about becoming the judge and jury in individual examples but about a general concept that the death penalty can be imposed and useful in cases of (insert the general case)
The judge and jury will impose the sentence. the prosecutors or state are the ones that say x case is a death penalty case .....
Don't you think so?
It is not about becoming the judge and jury in individual examples but about a general concept that the death penalty can be imposed and useful in cases of (insert the general case)
The judge and jury will impose the sentence. the prosecutors or state are the ones that say x case is a death penalty case .....
Don't you think so?
If you have moral, ethical, or practical arguments for, or against the death penalty, or any other penalty, then surely you must consider the moral, ethical, or practical issues of the crimes themselves, particularly in the case of mandatory sentencing.
As I understand it, execution is recorded as homicide on death certificates. What makes one homicide acceptable and another not?
jac_the_gripper: Thank you for the link, Guz.
I misunderstood the shortage issue.
I found the anaesthesia being used for caesarian sections interesting. I know someone who felt everything even though she was unconscious, as I did having a spinal anaesthetic. As I understand it, the realisation that some people feel everything under anaesthetic is currently being researched.
The wiki article also pointed to executed prisoners having too low a dose of the drug in their system to achieve unconsciousness. Given it only lasts for 5-10 minutes, I think it said, there seems to be a lot of room for error.
I misunderstood the shortage issue.
I found the anaesthesia being used for caesarian sections interesting. I know someone who felt everything even though she was unconscious, as I did having a spinal anaesthetic. As I understand it, the realisation that some people feel everything under anaesthetic is currently being researched.
The wiki article also pointed to executed prisoners having too low a dose of the drug in their system to achieve unconsciousness. Given it only lasts for 5-10 minutes, I think it said, there seems to be a lot of room for error.
It's true that we'll never be completely sure about if the drug just numbs them.
GUZMAN1: It's true that we'll never be completely sure about if the drug just numbs them.
Just provide the convicted with nutrysystem diet foods in a fruit fly free fashion for a year and poof, they expire happily.
galrads: Just provide the convicted with nutrysystem diet foods in a fruit fly free fashion for a year and poof, they expire happily.
And we'll never be sure about it. 
Have a good year.
GUZMAN1: And we'll never be sure about it.
Have a good year.
Have a good year.
You too...
What you say is cool...what the lady needs to do is check out the facts first...while what she said about executions under Bush, as governor of Texas is true, Texas state law says that a governor cannot get involved to stop an execution unless the Texas Parole Board makes a request to his office. But you are right also...seems like too many people want to blame Bush for almost everything...this lady should also jump on Rick Perry...more executions on his watch than Bush's.
Fruitbat 
I'm opposed to the death penalty, and opposed to "for profit" prison systems, period.
I'm opposed to the death penalty, and opposed to "for profit" prison systems, period.
jac_the_gripper: If you have moral, ethical, or practical arguments for, or against the death penalty, or any other penalty, then surely you must consider the moral, ethical, or practical issues of the crimes themselves, particularly in the case of mandatory sentencing.
As I understand it, execution is recorded as homicide on death certificates. What makes one homicide acceptable and another not?
As I understand it, execution is recorded as homicide on death certificates. What makes one homicide acceptable and another not?
One life is one life and one homicide is one homicide. Statistically speaking neither(or both)homicide should be acceptable. From a robotic perspective there is no difference between one homicide and another. The difference arises through having a sense of right and wrong and introducing the idea of worth into a Human life.
More Threads
What I Lack In Vocabulary
A question
"Emotions at the Crossroads"
What Clothes Do You Feel Comfortable Wearing?
It's been a long time....
Reality Check
Your Mental Health
New here. Single Guy from Grand Rapids, MI.
the death nail for dating websites
The world is as you see
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
I do see that point of view, but the innocent vulnerable members of society have to be protected first and foremost from recidivists.