Reply With Quote
really? well then I don't see how anyone can be in favor of it! First I thougth the gready, but now I'm thinking vile, sadistic human beings.
What the kind of sense are you trying to make?? Are you comparing being dead to having spent 20 years in prison?? Do you honestly believe they are the same ing thing?
yes smartass, and if they were in death row, half of them would be dead!But I'd like to wager that there are more innocent people serving life prison sentences than there are on death row.
really? well then I don't see how anyone can be in favor of it! First I thougth the gready, but now I'm thinking vile, sadistic human beings.
I know it costs more. I feel the added cost and the very, very, very small chance that someone that is innocent is put to death are worth it in the end. I am in no way saying the capital punishment system is perfect. I do believe that costs can be reduced as well as the risks of the innocent being executed.
It costs more because of the APPEALS PROCESS(ES)....not just the housing and feeding if them.
You missed the point. I was pointing that there is a much larger percentage of people that are wrongly serving life sentences than those who sit on death row and are innocent. The cases of those who sit on death row are much more greatly scrutinized than any cases which result in life sentences. Is that fair?What the kind of sense are you trying to make?? Are you comparing being dead to having spent 20 years in prison?? Do you honestly believe they are the same ing thing?
yes smartass, and if they were in death row, half of them would be dead!
Do you think that 20 years in prison is not a harsh penalty to serve? Everyone you know could be long gone before you get out. The prime of your life may be taken from you and you may be left with nothing. That to me is not that much better than death.
Again I ask, how many cases have there been PROVEN that a person was wrongly put to death? What is the %?
Certainly, you are not arguing that we do away with the appeals process. However, if you are not arguing that we should do away with the appeals process, I don't understand what point your observation supports/proves.
The appeals process is a necessary component of using death as a punishment. It still doesn't change the fact that it is more expensive to sentence one to death than it is to sentence them to life in prison.
I'm not sure that that is entirely true. The appellate process for a capital felon is only marginally different from that afforded any other felon.
In Texas, for example, a run-of-the-mill felony will result in at least two different appeals: an appeal to the court of appeals (which must pass on the merits of the appeal) and one to the Court of Criminal Appeals (which can choose whether to accept the case for further consideration or not). In many instances, the result in the Court of Criminal Appeals will be one on which the defendant seeks certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court (which, again, has discretion).
In a capital felony in which the death penalty is assessed, there are only two direct appeals: one to the Court of Criminal Appeals (which must take the case) and one to the United States Supreme Court (which has discretion to take the case or not). In a sense, then the death penalty case is likely to have less appellate costs associated with it than a non-death case that gets treatment at all three levels. There are some additional costs associated with habeas corpus proceedings, but recent changes in the law have limited the number of habeas proceedings that can be brought by a death row inmate.
And at that, in most instances, the only cost the State incurs past the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (i.e., at the U.S. Supreme Court level or in the habeas context) is the cost to pay for representation of indigent defendants. If the Supreme Court doesn't request a response to a pe ion for certiorari, the State has no obligation to file a brief; the same is true in habeas proceedings.
No I wasn't arguing anything, thanks. It was nothing more than a little factoid for someone that's not from the United States and may have not known that.
While I agree that a 20-year sentence would be a harsh penalty to serve, you can't compare it to death.
And again, I ask you, what percentage of people who are put to death need to be innocent before it is statistically relevant to you?
Think about it, if the system makes even one mistake (and this article is alleging that it did), that is one innocent person who was executed by the state. I know you feel that this is "a small price to pay overall," but tell that to the wrongly executed or his family.
Also, what if it was you that was sentenced to death even though you were innocent? As they are strapping you to the gurney for the lethal injection, would you be comforted by the thought that your death is but a small price to pay to ensure the safety of others?
So, your factoid was strictly for the benefit of our foreign posters.
Oh, and judging from a cir stance I've witnessed with my own eyes, a "without parole" sentence apparently doesn't mean a damn thing.
It's not fair, but it's also remediable. If someone wrongly serves a life sentence, the window of opportunity to prove his innocence remains open in a meaningful way. If the guy gets out the day before he dies, that's one day that he can live as a free man with his innocence proven. I don't find that to be insignificant.
I can't imagine that too many people would agree with your ultimate conclusion here. Twenty years spent wrongfully in prison is horrendous. But I don't see how you can equate 20 years wrongfully spent in prison with death. You may have the prime of your life taken from you and you may be left with nothing, but if your innocence is proven, you at least get your freedom back. Death removes that possibility in every cir stance.
The number is probably small. But that the percentage is even marginally above zero is shameful. It may not be convincing to you, but it is to me.
So, your factoid was strictly for the benefit of our foreign posters.
No, it was to see how quickly I could illicit a rude, condescending response. Good job, you win.
How can you be in favor of a system that, as you admit, is flawed and yet, continues to decide who is fit to live and who should die?
By the way, I am pro-death penalty ... but this was a very tragic cir stance.
If that's what I'd meant to imply, I'd have said so.
So let's continue putting innocent people to death because you had a bad experience with our penal system.
Makes sense.
Are you talking about a capital felon? As I understand it, "without the possibility of parole" in the capital context means that the convicted party remains in prison for the remainder of his life and gets no good time credit or anything along those lines. A captial felon's sentence can be shortened only by: (1) clemency; (2) pardon; (3) exculpatory evidence proving innocence.
IIRC, other felons can be sentenced without the possibility of parole, but can get certain credits to reduce the actual length of the sentence and, thus, can be released from prison before their sentences actually end without being paroled. I may be wrong about the latter case, though.
No . And anti-due process judging from your responses to this thread and others.
Whatever.
I was pro-death penalty before any of that. I don't put an awful lot of stock in: "Oh, but he'll/she'll be in prison for the rest of their life."
Yep, right on.
Right, but if the system is flawed, can we continue to risk killing innocent people just so you feel a little safer?Whatever.
I was pro-death penalty before any of that. I don't put an awful lot of stock in: "Oh, but he'll/she'll be in prison for the rest of their life."
And if your due process rights were violated, you'd be the first to complain.Yep, right on.
No, not really, if I ed up I deserve to be punished.
Also, even if it turned out that every person we execute was guilty, the death penalty is still given to minorities at a much higher rate than for others for the exact same crimes. How could you support such a system, knowing that it's killing Blacks and Mexicans at much greater numbers than it would if the system was color blind?Whatever.
I was pro-death penalty before any of that. I don't put an awful lot of stock in: "Oh, but he'll/she'll be in prison for the rest of their life."
That's the point. If your due process rights are violated, you may be punished even though you didn't up. That's what this whole thread is about.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
