by StinkyPantz 75 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Which is worse? A convicted murderer getting executed or a convicted murderer being released after serving the minimum of a life sentence, 15 years?
----------------------
BTW, before anyone even mentions the low recidivism rate of murderers, you must realize that that is only for those that have been caught. Many convicted murderer have learned how to commit a crime better by hanging out with their fellow criminals in prison.
a murder convicted and sentenced to either because, due to ethnic and economic caste system, he cannot afford "Justice" in the courts, but in that scenario, the death sentence is worse.
15 years Inside is life.
Gita-
I'm not really sure what you said, but it sounds like you think the guy shouldn't even be punished just because he couldn't afford a fancy lawyer to get him off.
What if the guy could afford a highpriced attorney and was caught on video?
So what if 15 years IS life, would you take a person who's lost a good chunk of his life in jail (which will often make them even more bitter) and release them often with nothing to lose? Can you honestly tell me that you'd be okay with a convicted murderer roaming the streets, or even living next door?
I'll clarify: Execution (in America.. most civilized nations do not have an execution program) is a political tool. Justice in america is not equal as it depends upon the quality of legal representation one can afford. The ratio of blacks on death row compared to blacks in the rest of the prison system is telling. At the same time it costs (in NY) 1.8 million dollers to put someone through the execution system. The same cost to keep the convict in prison for life is $600,000. Most murderers do not get executed. Execution, however, or the threat thereof, is a handy tool by prosecuters to get accused persons to agree to a deal. Of course once the deal is made, there is no chance of an appeal.
If it costs 2/3 less to keep a murder in jail till he dies, I'd rather pay THAT then the extra costs to kill him early. It makes fiscal sense, especially when state budgets are all in terrible shape. Call it Execution by Incarceration, if it makes the Rush Limbaugh crowd feel better.
Our legal system has simply shown too much bias, too many flaws, and too many easy-outs for the rich for me to support the death penalty at this time. In another time and place, maybe. Frankly the United States government is now a totally corrupt fascist moneymaking mechanism on par with the Soviet Union. I don't trust it and neither should you.
As for the 15 year thing.. consider what happens when a man is innocently convicted. If only the Hurricane COULD have gotten out in 15 years.
Those in favour of CP might find this interesting:
Englishman.
The Death Penalty: Fair and Effective in Texas
Author: Morgan Reynolds
Published: The Heartland Institute 03/01/2000
Can there be a crime (or string of crimes) so bad the culprit deserves to die? Thirty-eight states say yes, twelve states answer no. Count me among the majority.
There are a million and one arguments leveled against capital punishment: it's barbaric, racist, unnecessary, and has no deterrent effect, to name but a few of the most common objections.
It's impossible to refute this barrage in a column, so let's look at a concrete case. His name was Larry Robison, a white male, 42 years old. Robison, an ex-carpenter, had 13 years of schooling, no prior prison record, and spent 16 years on death row. He was an attractive-looking guy. His parents had generated some sympathy for their son because he was a former mental patient. They argued that his life should be spared because he didn't receive proper psychological help.
Robison's behavior was extraordinary, alright. Age 24 at the time of the offense, Robison was convicted of stabbing and shooting to death a 33-year-old white man. He also killed four others during the same incident, all white, in two adjacent lake cottages, for a total of five dead. One of the victims, allegedly Robison's homosexual lover, was decapitated and sexually mutilated. Robison fled the scene in a victim's car to Wichita, Kansas after the mass murder.
Court after court found Robison competent to stand trial. He had legal representation for 16 years. A Fort Worth court deemed him competent to suffer his fate as late as last November. He knew the consequences of what he had done, knew that it was wrong, and understood the legal process and his punishment. So what's the problem?
Laws in Texas
One out of every three executions in the U.S. occurs in Texas, by far the leading state for executions, with 37 lethal injections last year and another 13 scheduled through early May this year. As a result, Texas has the system down pat, and has passed scrutiny upon scrutiny, both within the state and outside. I can defend the practice in Texas, but probably not in Illinois, where Governor George Ryan has suspended executions while investigating how 13 men were wrongly sentenced to die.
Seven types of murder can qualify as capital crimes in Texas: murder of a child under six years of age; murder of a public safety officer, firefighter, or correctional officer; murder for hire; murder during the commission of specified felonies such as robbery; murders committed during prison escapes; murder by a prisoner serving a life sentence for any of five offenses; and multiple murders.
All murders are not the same event. Executions are saved for the worst and serve obvious utilitarian ends. Marginal deterrence--signaling--is necessary to discourage marginal harm. Robbers, for example, must be encouraged to leave victims and witnesses alive. Murderers must have an incentive to stop at one life snuffed. Guards need protection from "lifers," and everybody does from prison escapees. We're kidding ourselves if we believe that a life sentence means total isolation from society. Only death offers such separation.
Some acts are bad enough to deserve the death penalty as impartial retribution, pure and simple. Remember Jeffrey Dahmer, that butcher of boys and young men in Milwaukee? No death penalty in Wisconsin, so he got a life sentence from the court. But his fellow inmates gave him a death sentence, killing him in prison. So who was more just, the state or the inmates? I'd say the inmates got it right, even if they took the law into their own hands. Local sentiment varies, but government must take such opinion into account--if too many criminals walk or the system is too soft, people will do the job on criminals that government won't.
Does the death penalty deter? In Texas, the murder rate has fallen over 60 percent since the state started using the death penalty seriously for selected crimes in the 1990s, while the national murder rate fell 33 percent.
Coincidence? Maybe. But the spirit and practice of orderly retribution is a mark of civilization. Societies unwilling to execute their worst criminals expose the low value they place on the lives of victims.
Who'd want to live in a country where the government sponsors the killing of it's own citizens? Mark my words, if the government has such a high disregard for human life, then so will it's citizens also.
Much as I love America generally, no way can it go on using punishments that are now only used by the likes of China and the arab countries where human life is held in low regard as a matter of custom.
Time you were done with it, USA, it's well past time.http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=8&did=245
Englishman.
A Quote From A Song By Good Charlotte About The Rich & Famous & How They’re Life & Justice Works
Well did you know when you're famous you could kill your wife and there’s no such thing as 25 to lifeWhat kind of world are we living in? A world obsessed with money. As long as you have money you can do anything. So there is no such thing as fair because lawbreakers are getting out of jail because they have a big pocket book. Honestly, we might as well let everyone out of jail now shouldn't we? I don't see the difference. And for your question I believe that no one has the right to take the life of another. Murderers should be allowed to live but not in the streets with everyone else. They should just be sentenced to life in jail never allowed out again. Their punishment "They just lost everything, living with the memory of what they have done & why they are there" Vash
as long as you got the cash to pay for Cochran
And did you know if you were caught and you were smoking crack
and McDonald's wouldn’t even want to take you back
you could always just run for mayor of D.C. - Song "Lifestyles Of The Rich & The Famous"
Mark my words, if the government has such a high disregard for human life, then so will it's citizens also.
Many people back the death penalty because they have a very high regard for life - the life of the innocent victims.
rem
Rem.. thats the typical conservative answer, but basically history shows conservatives just get off on killing people.
