theyeti

With the recent decision to try accused sniper John Lee Malvo, who was 16 at the time, as an adult, which almost certainly means the death penalty; and outgoing Illinois governor George Ryan's commutation of all death row inmates to life, I figured that it was time for the Death Penalty Poll. The national debate on the issue seems to be ready to be revisited, especially since we have the combination of likely execution of a minor, and a governor who goes all out in excercising his pardon powers, all within a couple of weeks. So what do you think?

theyeti

[edited to add]:

[Unfortunately, the poll is American-centric. Any non-Americans should feel welcome to answer though by assuming your country had a death penalty system close to ours. In other words, if your country doesn't have a death penalty and you would like one similar to America's, vote for "I favor the death penalty and the current system does not need reform..." even though you don't have a current system.]

hezekiah jones

I'm firmly with Steve Earle.

beyelzu

i have been in favor of the dealth penalty for many years. i am currently reevaluating some of my belief systems. what the governor did was wrong because he pardoned people and released them, even if he felt that the death penalty is wrong it still doesnt make sense to release the prisoners. i have 2 concerns with the death penalty. it costs more to execute someone in america than it does to keep someone imprisoned for life. (if i am not mistaken its about 4 times as much) and thus the death penalty is ineffecient. amnesty international argues that the prolonged wait on death row is cruel and unusual punishment. i agree with this position after all there are states that have people on death row that havent had an execution since 1967.

if the death penalty is used it should be done in a timely manner. no more than 2 yrs after sentencing. and the appeals process should be streamlined to allow for this time frame. this should deal with the cruel and unusual wait on death row and the ineffeciency.

personally, however, i am just not sure how i feel about taking another persons life unless it is done to protect my own or someone else's. (i am considering secular humanism and i just am not sure how i presently feel about the death penalty)

i do think that serial killers should receive the death penalty but i think that those cases actually only make a small percentage of the death row population.

theyeti

Actually, he just commuted their sentences to life in prison. He did not release anyone that I know of. (The confusion is probably my fault, since I used the word "pardon" in the OP, which is technically incorrect.)

These are both good points, but from my utilitarian aspect, the two pertinent facts are:

1. The death penalty does not deter crime.

2. It costs more than life imprisonment.

It's really hard to find a utilitarian purpose for something like that, which is probably why death penalty supporters use so many appeals to emotion. (Everytime a pro-DP pundit talks about the death penalty, I guarantee they will describe some brutal murder in gorry detail.) But these appeals have little effect on me. They work both ways too.

Yes, but this has generally been the policy of most death penalty states for the last 20 odd years. Not only streamlining the appeals process, but also limiting the amount of time in which new evidence can be introduced, and other "reforms" intended to speed things up. Unfortunately, the lengthy appeals process and the high standards of evidence have proven to be necessary barriers to prevent executing the innocent. Lowering those barriers has been a total disaster, which is why we're in the mess we're in now.

theyeti

Nira

I�m totally against the DP. My basic idea is that it�s not about what the �criminal� have done; it�s about the values we want to live by. People that does terrible acts have to be detained in order to keep the society safe, but should be treated within the limits we wish to promote in society at large.

callmejay

"Actually, he just commuted their sentences to life in prison. He did not release anyone that I know of."

As I understand it he commuted everyone's sentence to life in prison, but a day or two earlier, he pardoned (i.e. they are now free) four convicts whose "confessions" had been beating out of them by the Chicago police.

Why I think the death penalty is wrong:

It might serve several purposes: (1) revenge or making the victims' families somehow get closure, (2) act as a deterrent, (3) enact some form of "justice," (4) make sure the criminal will never be able to commit the crimes again, or (5) it could in theory be cheaper than life in prison.

I don't think that (1) is sufficient reason to kill a person. I don't think that (2) works very much, and even if it did, it would have to work pretty damn well for me to justify it. I don't really believe in (3) since I can't figure out how it is different than revenge + deterrent. (Actual) life in prison resolves (4.) There is no doubt in my mind that (5) is a terrible, terrible reason, even if it were true.

Even if I agreed with one or more of the reasons, I still would probably be against it because of the innocent people who would inevitably be executed erroneously.

queue

Do you have a link that shows the differences in the costs and a detailed breakdown of the amounts in the costs (e.g. lawyer expenses, court costs, food, electricity,...etc.)?

theyeti

You can try this page for some info:

Millions Misspent.

It appears to be in-depth (haven't read it yet) but it's from an anti-DP group, so maybe you'd like something from a more obejctive source. I'll try to find some good stats later after I get home (me is sick )

Generally speaking, the figures that I've heard from most states is that it costs between 2-3 million per execution, whereas it usually costs <$20,000 per year for imprisonment. This means that it would take about 100 years of imprisonment to cost more than execution, not accounting for the interest. The average life imprisonment last about 30-40 years if I remember correctly. I can't tell you how the costs break down though. I would imagine that a large percentage of the cost of execution is for appeals.

theyeti

Shake

WARNING! The following opinion is rather cold-hearted! But please read through to the end before commenting.

This is one issue I constantly re-evaluate my position on. I am mainly in favor of it, but have come to see that there is room for improvement. Some reforms that have been mentioned above would help lower the cost: like expediting the system. And no, in its current form, hidden behind the prison walls, it's not a deterrent for crime. This why my suggestion is to bring back public hangings! Maybe even the guillotine! Then leave the body out for a while ... that might be a bit more of a deterrent! It isn't now because it doesn't seem real to most people.

I still don't fully buy into the "it costs more to execute someone" schtick either. Show me the numbers. I won't believe it 'til I see it. Let's say a person is convicted of a capital crime at age 18. Let's see ... life in prison: for a male average life expectancy is in the early 70s, so you've gotta cloth and feed him for over 50 years! Meanwhile, with a faster system, you could have him gone within 2-3 years. How is that more costly?

Actually, what about a firing squad? Or heck, you don't even need a squad. Just get one sharpshooter, with one bullet. Gee, what's the cost of a bullet? Or let the SWAT guys use him as target practice. Yeah sure, there's cleanup costs too, but that's not too high.

I know, I know, the system's not perfect. None is. I know that. I'd like to believe that all criminals can be rehabilitated, but it's just not true. For the worst of the worst, there is no straightening them out, and they'll just be a drain on society. Why keep around dead weight? I don't believe the current system does enough to rehabilitate prisoners and make them useful to society. I am absolutely for the chain gangs that are out cleaning up the highways and doing other work that no one else wants to do. But you obviously can't take chances with certain sorts of criminal. Yes, I think human life is precious, but those who have complete disregard for it and have no regrets either, IMHO, have no right to live. I'd love to see the prisons actually take in criminals and send out truly reformed people who are willing to do their part in society and be good citizens. But, I'm a realist, and I don't see that happening any time soon.

Why should being in prison be better than being in the military? In the service you voluntarily give up some of your basic rights as an American. People in prison have committed crimes and should thus be forced to forfeit their rights. If they can show that they can change, then they should be given a second chance, but until then, why am I subsidizing their cable TV and gyms, etc.?

OK, I'll stop before I get too far sidetracked and further disorganized with my response. [/rant]

August Spies

Here are my thoughts:

On an abstract level I believe some people deserve to die. If we lived in the magical desert ( ) I would say there are people that deserve to die. I would have no problem killing Henry Kissinger or the adult Sniper.

However, in the real world I think the deatlh penalty is wrong. For one it gives the goverment too much power. Secondly, the system is nowhere near perfect and many people are innocent who get executed (for example something like 30 people have been released since 1997 based on new DNA evidence, 30 innocent people that would have been killed). And of course thirdly it costs more and is more cruel.

Shake:
do you have any actual counter evidence? It sounds like you are saying "I don't think this fact, so im gonna pretend its not true." There have already been links posted to the info above.
Much of the cost is due to appeals and court costs. But there is nto really much of a way to fix this.

you could not let prisoners have appeals.... but then you are FAR more likely to murder innocent people.

yeah lets kill the old people too

are you going to tell me prisoners don't give up almost all of their basic rights?