Do you support the death penalty?

[Madiganistan]

As a fellow Australian, I am strongly against the executions of my countrymen. The drug crime rate in Indonesia has not gone down after they've started this new zero tolerance approach.

Ah, compelling point! Too bad it's not true.

Even when crime rises in Indonesia, it's generally due to corruption in underdeveloped areas, and even the perception of a rising crime rate is the result of a decrease in violent crime being offset by marginal increases in petty and nonviolent offenses.

Never mind the fact that Indonesia's crime rate is and historically has been enviably low for the region. You surely wouldn't have had any way of knowing that, though.

[Camelza]

That's just cruel and no, it isn't.

A quick, drunken glossing of this source seems to verify that it's concurrent with all the other claims about the cost of capital punishment-- the comparison is strictly between the length and cost of death and life-without-parole trials from a legal standpoint, and doesn't take into account the cost of sustaining each individual prisoner's life (sources that claim that even *this* is more expensive than capital punishment tend to omit legal costs from those examples, while including it in the death cases. Funny how we can make numbers say however we want if we trust that the readers will take our infographics at face value). If by some chance you actually happen to be expertly familiar with this advocacy group and didn't just google for a "sauce" (which is what I presume of every NSG commenter), please feel free to provide evidence to the contrary; I'd appreciate the correction.

Principled opposition to capital punishment is one thing, but the "cost" debate is such a manipulated game that it can't stand as a solitary rationale for either position.

Of course I'd be happy to correct you, since death penalty cases are indeed far more expensive than any other kind of judicial case.
The death penalty is much more expensive than life without parole because the Constitution requires a long and complex judicial process for capital cases. This process is needed in order to ensure that innocent men and woman are not executed for crimes they did not commit, and even with these protections the risk of executing an innocent person can not be completely eliminated.

If the death penalty was replaced with a sentence of Life Without the Possibility of Parole*, which costs millions less and also ensures that the public is protected while eliminating the risk of an irreversible mistake, the money saved could be spent on programs that actually improve the communities in which we live.

Using conservative rough projections, it is estimated that the annual costs of the present (death penalty) system are around $137 million per year.
The cost of a system which imposes a maximum penalty of lifetime incarceration instead of the death penalty would be $11.5 million per year.
http://www.deathpenalty.org/downloads/F ... 0.2008.pdf

[Madiganistan]

Poll voting will end in three days time. Whoever has the most votes (Team Yes or Team No) will win the debate.

Uh, one side doesn't win a debate just because they have more people on their side.
Winning a debate comes down to who has better arguments.

He seems to be under the impression that this totally unique and never-been-done-before thread is the talk of NSG and he's some great arbiter of the Debate of Our Time.

[Shigiel]

This issue is hugely, hugely contextual. I wouldn't want a bourgeois state to have the power to kill people, but then again, I wouldn't want a bourgeois state to exist at all. But in a dictatorship of the proletariat? I can see the death penalty existing, simply to get rid of troublesome people. It's a lot better than prisons anyway; often, life imprisonment is worse for a criminal than a quick death, prisons harden criminals, and a lot of resources could be saved by having ostracism, lack of access to resources or even rehabilitation instead of imprisonment.

[New Frenco Empire]

I am a lot more reserved on the issue than I once was, but I consider myself largely undecided on the issue. Yes, I do believe that many criminals can be brought back to the civilized world and yes, I do worry that innocent people may get the axe if we're not careful. However, the appeals to emotion that claim that the state has no right to take a life/carry out an act of revenge do not phase me.

As it stands, a single murder with questionable evidence is not worthy. Genocidal dictators and terrorist masterminds and the like? They're best removed from the equation.

[Madiganistan]

A quick, drunken glossing of this source seems to verify that it's concurrent with all the other claims about the cost of capital punishment-- the comparison is strictly between the length and cost of death and life-without-parole trials from a legal standpoint, and doesn't take into account the cost of sustaining each individual prisoner's life (sources that claim that even *this* is more expensive than capital punishment tend to omit legal costs from those examples, while including it in the death cases. Funny how we can make numbers say however we want if we trust that the readers will take our infographics at face value). If by some chance you actually happen to be expertly familiar with this advocacy group and didn't just google for a "sauce" (which is what I presume of every NSG commenter), please feel free to provide evidence to the contrary; I'd appreciate the correction.

Principled opposition to capital punishment is one thing, but the "cost" debate is such a manipulated game that it can't stand as a solitary rationale for either position.

Of course I'd be happy to correct you

How very thoughtful of you! Too bad I have to reiterate this, though:

the comparison is strictly between the length and cost of death and life-without-parole trials from a legal standpoint, and doesn't take into account the cost of sustaining each individual prisoner's life (sources that claim that even *this* is more expensive than capital punishment tend to omit legal costs from those examples, while including it in the death cases. Funny how we can make numbers say however we want if we trust that the readers will take our infographics at face value).

Now considering you just CNTRL-F'd for what you needed so you could copy and paste statistics that ostensibly support your perspective, I'm walk you through a little exercise in epistemology: page 82 triumphantly declares that the cost of confinement for a life-without-parole inmate would be roughly $55,000 less than confinement costs for a death row inmate without citing any reputable sources (I have to qualify it with the term 'reputable' because a frightening number of the sources are actually LA Times articles-- op-eds, no less) or even providing any independent rationales for why the disparity would exist-- this souce, which incidentally doesn't look like it was slapped together by a bill sponsor's capitol interns for distribution the week before a floor vote, would suggest that a lot of it has to do with the fact that "other prisoners," the category weighed against death row inmates in the cost of confinement comparison, includes a lot of nonviolent youth and other inmates whose crimes actually might not appropriately warrant incarceration, and all it takes is a moment of contextual thinking to realize that minimum and medium security prisons incur less expenses than supermaxes housing serial murderers.

Again:

Principled opposition to capital punishment is one thing, but the "cost" debate is such a manipulated game that it can't stand as a solitary rationale for either position.

[Camelza]

Of course I'd be happy to correct you

How very thoughtful of you! Too bad I have to reiterate this, though:

the comparison is strictly between the length and cost of death and life-without-parole trials from a legal standpoint, and doesn't take into account the cost of sustaining each individual prisoner's life (sources that claim that even *this* is more expensive than capital punishment tend to omit legal costs from those examples, while including it in the death cases. Funny how we can make numbers say however we want if we trust that the readers will take our infographics at face value).

Now considering you just google searched for what you needed so you could copy and paste statistics that sounded ostensibly support your perspective, I'm going to point something out in the commission report you didn't read: page 82 triumphantly declares that the cost of confinement for a life-without-parole inmate would be roughly $55,000 less than confinement costs for a death row inmate without citing any reputable sources (I have to qualify it with the term 'reputable' because a frightening number of the sources are actually LA Times articles-- op-eds, no less) or putting forth any independent rationales for why the disparity would exist-- this souce, which incidentally doesn't look like it was slapped together by a bill sponsor's capitol interns for distribution the week before a floor vote, would suggest that a lot of it has to do with the fact that "other prisoners," the category weighed against death row inmates in the comparison, includes a lot of nonviolent youth and other inmates whose crimes actually might not appropriately warrant incarceration, and all it takes is a moment of contextual thinking to realize that minimum and medium security prisons incur less expenses than supermaxes housing serial murderers.

Again:

Principled opposition to capital punishment is one thing, but the "cost" debate is such a manipulated game that it can't stand as a solitary rationale for either position.

Well, then we'll agree that we disagree, my sources are fine.

[The Five Galaxies]

I'd prefer for them to be sent to prison for life rather than be put to death; however if they are given life without parole then they should be offered the chance to get euthanized just to get it over and done with since the result would be the same anyway.

[Esternial]

Purely from a moral viewpoint, I oppose it.

Unfortunately, sometimes death of a criminal may be the more economic option. If there were more space and funds for infrastructure then there would be absolutely no argument in favour of the death penalty.

Actually, offering voluntary euthanasia to incarcerated criminals may not be such a bad idea.

[Big Jim P]

Yes, I support the death penalty.

[CTALNH]

Purely from a moral viewpoint, I oppose it.

Unfortunately, sometimes death of a criminal may be the more economic option. If there were more space and funds for infrastructure then there would be absolutely no argument in favour of the death penalty.

Actually, offering voluntary euthanasia to incarcerated criminals may not be such a bad idea.

That system could be abused hard.

[CTALNH]

Yes, I support the death penalty.

For real or is this bait?

[Ethel mermania]

At this point, shit posting Should be punished by death.

[Val Halla]

Yes, I support the death penalty.

For real or is this bait?

Why would it be? Bait, that is.

[Wraland]

I do not support the death penalty. Better to just have their lives spent in a cell.

[Esternial]

Purely from a moral viewpoint, I oppose it.

Unfortunately, sometimes death of a criminal may be the more economic option. If there were more space and funds for infrastructure then there would be absolutely no argument in favour of the death penalty.

Actually, offering voluntary euthanasia to incarcerated criminals may not be such a bad idea.

That system could be abused hard.

Do elaborate.

[Big Jim P]

Yes, I support the death penalty.

For real or is this bait?

Why would it not be for real?

[CTALNH]

That system could be abused hard.

Do elaborate.

Someone gets 7 years in prison can't coup with it and choses to kill himself.

State wants someone gone signs his death warrant for him.

etc etc.

[CTALNH]

For real or is this bait?

Why would it not be for real?

I don't know not many people have the same opinion as I do in nsg.

Just saying.

[Big Jim P]

Why would it not be for real?

I don't know not many people have the same opinion as I do in nsg.

Just saying.

Some of my own opinions are not that popularly shared either.

[Esternial]

Do elaborate.

Someone gets 7 years in prison can't coup with it and choses to kill himself.

State wants someone gone signs his death warrant for him.

etc etc.

Well, euthanasia is voluntary. If one can't cope with such a short sentence and sees only death as their way out, I don't particularly see the issue with that choice, provided they've had a chat with an expert.

Not sure how the state is an entity that can want someone gone. Regardless, I did mean euthanasia, not a death sentence. The same checks apply.

[Barboneia]

I don't support the death penalty. No matter what the crime may be, it's no reason to kill your fellow man, even if they seem less a man then a monster.

[Big Jim P]

I don't support the death penalty. No matter what the crime may be, it's no reason to kill your fellow man, even if they seem less a man then a monster.

Most crimes that warrant the death penalty also warrant the criminal being shot by his/her intended victim.

[Jetan]

Only for wartime treason.

[Torisakia]

Since I follow a "do unto others as they do unto you" moral, I support the death penalty as an option for murderers or any other criminals who've killed people/animals/objects/etc. I believe they pretty much lose their privilege as a human when they commit the crime, so I don't see why we should spare them the time.